75B: .40 vs 9?

[ACSial]

What are the differences between the .40 and the 9mm versions of the CZ-75B? I've heard that the .40 has a beefier slide and ambidextrous safety--is this true? And are there any feeding and other reliability issues with the .40? (In Canada, we're limited to 10rd. mags, so it might as well be .40...)

Also, is the Omega trigger such an improvement over the standard trigger?

[b5.5dan]

First off, Welcome to CZ Forum! You should post a thread introducing yourself. Ok, now to what you came here for... 
My experience doesn't allow me to answer all of your questions, but I will do what i can until someone with more experience pipes in.
The CZ-USA catalog lists the specs (every spec) for the 75B in either 9mm (my personal favorite) and the .40 S&W as identical. Across the board. So I don't think that the .40 slide is any beefier. I could be wrong, but in order to keep the specs identical for both but enhance the .40, they would have had to have taken from somewhere else and I'm quite sure that they haven't. Also, I have held the two, and there is no difference there.

As to the decocker and ambidexterous slide release, well, the 75B doesn't have ambi. The 75BD has a decocker, but for the ambi controls, I believe you are looking at the 85 line (B/Combat). The 85 doesn't appear to have a decocker (again, looking at the 2011/12 catalog).

Feeding issues shouldn't be, well, an issue.  I have fired and experienced some problems with the .40 S&W in other firearms, but with the 75/85, you are getting a full-size, combat ready firearm made by one of (hey; THE) finest small arms manufacturers on Earth.

That brings me to my last point, in answer to the question you never asked haha! In a choice between the 9mm Para and the .40 S&W, I would take 9mm every time. Why? In spite of the fact that the .40 is, ballistically, a more potent round, things in general just seem to work better in 9mm. The .40 is a relatively new round, and I think that there are just fundamental problems with it. I don't like the truncated cone, and I don't like the fact that the .40 seems to produce more felt recoil than even a .45 ACP. Is the recoil from a .40 unmanageable? Not at all. Is it unpleasant to me personally? Yeah, but not so much that I wouldn't consider buying another pistol chambered for it sometime in the future. But again, that's just me.

So all things considered, I think that the choice here should be which round are you going to be happier with. Which will allow you to go out and shoot more? Which will make you feel secure in the caliber you have chosen? And finally, will you be willing to either stock another caliber or build your pistol collection around the .40 S&W. Pure personal choice. But you should feel confident that when you purchase a CZ pistol, in any caliber, you will be getting a well-made, naturally-pointing, and beautiful firearm that will last you for years to come.

Hmm... Stuck with 10-rounders?  That might factor into my decision on caliber choice too...
And finally (finally), again; welcome to CZ Forum. You'll love it here!
Regards,
Dan

[GM4469]

CZ has an awesome way of having different things for different guns

the standard 75B..single side safety with a narrowed slide.



the 75B in .40 in fact does have ambi safety, but single side slide release. the slide is full and does not have the narrowed front. also the front of the slide is squard and not rounded like the 9mm 75B
This is a 75B .40 slide that was put on a 75SA frame. but you get the idea of the slide shape.

[b5.5dan]

Interesting. I stand corrected. So either that fuller frame doesn't actually weigh any more, or the catalog lied. Why do all that for the .40? I really hate that cartridge... 

[GM4469]

CZ does really strange things sometimes from model to model. I think a lot of it is because they can.

OMEGA trigger.
DA stroke feels a little longer. SA letoff is extremely nice.

better. apples and oranges.

[ACSial]

Thanks for all the replies. Obviously, since I live in 'Trudeaupia,' this will be a 'fun-gun,' for range shooting. I like the idea of an all-steel gun (I wish they would make guns out of something like austempered ductile iron, but that's another story...), and putting wooden (cocobolo) grips on it.

I don't like the truncated cone.

Why did they do this, with the .40/10mm? I know that people who cast bullets like this sort of profile, and most of the moulds are so shaped. I literally have a pail of old wheelwheights and whatnot that I'd like to one day use for casting. Is the 9mm's profile less snaggy?

[b5.5dan]

Well, I feel like a complete moron since nearly all the info I gave you on the 9mm vs. .40 was wrong,  , but I DO know that standard, non-JHP ammo in 9mm is almost all cone and snag-free. You gan get stuff like the Ranger Nato that has a flat tip, but for the most part the 9mm is round tipped like pistol ammo is supposed to be  .

It's a heck of a lot cheaper to shoot, too...
And CZ Custom has some gorgeous cocobolo grips for $50. And if you spend a little more, there are several people who make amazing grips for the 75.