Surplus Firearm Review: CZ 70 (and CZ 50)
One of our original intentions for this blog was to review surplus firearms, as well as those which are somewhat obscure. In keeping with this goal, we are going to start reviewing some various firearms to give people an idea of what these models are like.
In this we will break down the different aspects of the CZ 70, aka CZ vzor 70. There are some aspects of this firearm which are great, and some issues which are worth noting. Naturally, the model pictured has been outfitted with our 3d printed grips, and the slide has been covered in cerakote.
Lets begin: An introduction to the CZ 70 and CZ 50
The Czeska Zbrojovka model 70 is essentially an updated version of the model 50, both of which are named in relation to their year of initial production 1950 and 1970. The difference between to the two is minimal, and I can go into the fine hairs of such differences if needed another day.
These pistols are straight blowback pistols. This means that the barrel is fixed to the frame. With a caliber such as 7,65 Browning (.32acp) this design works great. The barrel is low, and the minimal recoil goes up one’s forearm and is absorbed well.
Often these are described as being variants of the Walther PP design, although the origins of the CZ are somewhat unique.
Ammunition Compatibility 7/10
These firearms are chambered in 7,65 Browning, which is often called .32 acp. I have heard, although I cannot substantiate, rumors that the tolerances of .32acp and 7,65 Browning are slightly different. Again, I cannot substantiate this, but I do know that ammo labeled as “7,65 Browning” runs excellently in these pistols, but there are a few brands of .32 acp which do not run so great in these. Even cheap ammo labeled 7,65 browning runs well, and I recommend the Fiocchi ammo if you are wanting to have fun with a CZ 70 or CZ 50. European brands tend to work great in these pistols on the whole.
We polished the feed ramps on our pistols, because one of the 3 we purchased had feed issues. However, we ultimately isolated the issue as being related to the magazine. Thus, you probably won’t have to polish your pistols feed ramp, but it doesn’t hurt.
if you are having feed or ejection issues, it may not be the ammo, but the magazine. I will cover this further down.
Controls: 7/10
The controls on these firearms are great. There is a safety lever, and you can decock the hammer if you push down on the safety lever when in the “safe” position. There is no slide release lever, which is consistent with the general Walther PP design.
The magazine release is in a good location on the left side next to the trigger area. It can be somewhat difficult to press with the factory grips; hence, in our design we cut back on the grips to make it easier to release the magazine. However, this is a trivial issue. You shouldn’t have to worry about the magazine accidentally releasing with this mag release.
These pistols break down differently than other pistols of the Walther PP form. Instead of pulling the trigger guard down, there is actually a button you push on the side of the frame to release the slide. The button was revised a bit on the CZ 70 update, and it does protrude out a bit. This is not a problem, unless you have a thin holster and carry it in the waistband on your left side. The take-down button will dig into your side if given the chance! However, if you are right handed, or left handed with a nice holster, it will not bother you.
Conceal Carry: 9/10
These pistols are about the same size as a Glock 43. The only significant size difference between these pistols and the g43 is found in the magazine base, thus either the g43 or the cz70/cz50 can be larger depending on the magazine base style. If both the g43 and cz70/cz50 have a flat base, they are about the same size in length, height, and width.
The pistol is heavy for its size, but not too bad. It is a good size for conceal carry. The only reason I don’t give it a 10/10 is the excessive protrusion of the take-down button.
Hammer-fire Design: 7/10
This 8/10 rating is not of the concept of hammer-fire, but of this specific manifestation of the hammer-fire design. Personally I prefer hammer fire pistols, as one can finely tune the trigger to have a crisp light trigger.
The hammer springs on these are not overly stiff, and the hammer has a nice burr so you can cock it yourself. It is both single and double action.
The hammers on these tend to have a slight amount of grit in their travel, but that is due to the metal composition and finish. All of the examples of these pistols I have touched have felt this way. It is gritty, but not a significant issue. Just a trivial thing to give them character.
Single Action: 8/10
In single action mode (hammer already cocked back), the hammer is very clean and consistent. The reset is nice and not overbearing.
Double Action: 5/10
The double action is a tad long and stiff, and it has a gritty feel to it. It is not the worst, but it is not the best. It’s what one would expect from a double action trigger. Nothing to be a deterrent, just realize if you pull it out quickly with the hammer down the trigger will be long and stiff. One can have the safety on with the hammer cocked on this design, so that is something to consider when preparing yourself for drawing. However, that requires fine motors skills to flip the safety with your thumb. In short, know your pistol, know your skill set, and do what you are most comfortable with. This pistol has safety or a long double action.
Magazines: 4/10
The magazines for these pistols are often terrible. Why? The springs and the followers. My dad, my brother, and myself all bought some cz70 examples at the same time. We also bought 3 extra mags. The pistol my brother bought would not feed, and the culprit was the magazine.
A lot of these magazines are old, and the springs are awful. If you have issues with your cz70, the reason is probably the magazine. You can buy springs from Wolff which will take care of this issue.
The magazine capacity is 8 rounds (plus one).
Build Quality Without Magazine; 9/10
These pistols are built well, and are fairly consistent from pistol to pistol. They truly are great pistols. The magazine is a true downfall for these.
Finish Quality: 6/10
On many of these pistols the finish is coming off. It tends to flake off and can allow some rust patches to manifest. With that said, these pistols are solid, so it is not a big issue.
Factory Ergonomics: 6/10
The factor grips are a bit crude. Not the worst, but certainly crude. The grips are somewhat part of the frame, as they wrap around the back of the pistol to conceal the spring. The pistol needs the grips in order to be held.
Recoil Softness: 8/10
This one is somewhat subjective. I would give it a 10/10 myself, but some people with smaller hands say it has a tad of recoil. It feels just a hair snappier than my 22lr PPK/s. Not near as much recoil as the g43.
Price: 10/10
These are priced great, and of higher quality than many new pistols you can buy for the same money. We paid around $200 for each of ours in 2016.
Conclusion:
Overall Rating of Pistol Without Magazine: 9/10
These are great pistols for the money. The only hold back is the magazine quality, which can be overcome with new springs.
Overall Rating of Pistol & Magazine: 7/10
If you purchase one, you may end up with a terrible magazine. So keep that in mind, and be ready to get new mag springs. Still, this is a minor inconvenience, that doesn’t up the price too much.
