CZ 75 vs Beretta 92: Comparing Two DA/SA Icons for Modern Shooters

What's the difference between the CZ 75 or Beretta 92?  The CZ 75 and Beretta 92 are both full-size, double-action 9mm pistols, but they differ in design, feel, and operation.

The CZ 75 uses an internal slide rail system — the slide rides inside the frame, lowering the bore axis and giving it a tighter, smoother recoil impulse. It has an all-steel frame, excellent ergonomics, and a single-action/double-action trigger with a frame-mounted safety or decocker, depending on variant. Its design allows a high grip and outstanding accuracy with a natural point of aim.

The Beretta 92, by contrast, uses an open-top slide with external rails and a locking block system. It’s known for extreme reliability and smooth cycling, even in dirty conditions. The standard 92FS has an aluminum frame, a longer trigger reach, and a slide-mounted safety/decocker, which some shooters find less intuitive.

 

Similarities Between Beretta 92 vs CZ 75

The CZ 75 and Beretta 92 share a lot of common ground. Both are full-size, all-metal 9mm pistols built for military and police service, and both operate on a short-recoil, locked-breech system. Each offers a double-action/single-action trigger, exposed hammer, and excellent accuracy potential thanks to their solid barrel lockup and long sight radius.

They’re both known for reliability, soft recoil, and smooth cycling, with designs that favor durability and control during rapid fire. Their balance, weight, and traditional craftsmanship make them favorites among shooters who prefer classic metal-framed handguns over polymer designs.

In essence, the CZ 75 and Beretta 92 are cut from the same cloth—battle-proven, accurate, and refined service pistols that deliver consistent performance on the range or in duty use.

Two Service Pistols Born in 1975—Worlds Apart

The CZ 75 and Beretta 92 share a birth year—1975—but their origins reflect two vastly different geopolitical and industrial realities. Each pistol emerged from a unique set of design goals, legal constraints, and military doctrines, yet both would go on to become staples in the global DA/SA sidearm lineage.

CZ 75: Cold War Precision from Behind the Curtain

The CZ 75 was engineered by František and Josef Koucký at Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod (CZUB), a key Czechoslovak arms manufacturer. Though Czechoslovakia was a Warsaw Pact member under Soviet influence, the CZ 75 was not designed for Soviet military doctrine, which favored the 9×18mm Makarov in compact pistols like the Makarov PM.

Instead, the CZ 75 was a privately developed export-oriented project, designed around the 9×19mm Parabellum cartridge—standard in Western NATO countries. Its purpose was commercial: to offer an accurate, ergonomic, and high-capacity 9mm handgun for sport shooting and foreign sales. Its DA/SA system, internal frame-slide design, and ability to carry "cocked and locked" offered an appealing alternative to the Browning Hi Power and 1911 platforms in civilian and competition markets.

Because Cold War patent restrictions prevented international protection, clones proliferated across Europe and the Middle East. Despite this, the CZ 75 achieved global recognition as a mechanically sound, shooter-friendly platform.

Beretta 92: Open Slide Engineering and NATO Service Ambition

Meanwhile, in Italy, Beretta leveraged decades of experience to modernize its full-size pistol offering. The Beretta 92 was heavily influenced by the Walther P38, borrowing the open-top slide design and falling locking block barrel system for smooth cycling and reliable ejection. Its double-action/single-action trigger, combined with a slide-mounted decocker/safety, aligned with NATO and Western military preferences for pistol safety mechanisms.

Unlike CZ, Beretta operated in a free market. The 92 was protected by global patents, immediately available for export, and tuned for military adoption. That ambition paid off: the Beretta 92FS became the M9, adopted by the U.S. Armed Forces in 1985 after winning the Joint Service Small Arms Program trials, beating the Sig Sauer P226 by offering a lower total procurement cost.

The 92 platform became one of the most widely issued 9mm service pistols in NATO and law enforcement agencies worldwide.

Timeline: Development and Global Adoption

Year	CZ 75	Beretta 92
1975	Prototype developed by CZUB, internally tested in Czechoslovakia	Initial release; civilian and police markets in Italy
1980s	Cloned by Tanfoglio, IWI; informal military adoption in Eastern Europe	Selected as U.S. M9 service pistol (1985); global military adoption begins
1990s–2000s	CZ 75B variant with firing pin block becomes standard; growing civilian use	92FS widely adopted in NATO countries, continues as military and LEO sidearm
2010s–Present	Modern variants like P-01 and SP-01 introduced; high use in sport shooting	92X series introduced; modular upgrades and improved sights

 

This foundational section sets up the reader—and search engines—with clear temporal, technical, and geopolitical distinctions between the two platforms. It strengthens topic relevance for queries related to military pistol history, DA/SA pistol design, and Cold War-era firearm development.

Technical Blueprint: Internal Mechanics Compared

Slide Design, Lockup, Barrel Interface, and Trigger Systems

Although both the CZ 75 and Beretta 92 are full-size 9mm DA/SA service pistols, their internal mechanical systems reflect two divergent engineering philosophies. These differences—particularly in slide design, barrel lockup, and safety systems—significantly impact how each gun feels, performs, and functions under stress.

Slide-in-Frame vs Open-Top Slide Design

The CZ 75 employs a slide-in-frame design, where the slide rides on internal frame rails, similar to the Sig P210. This creates a lower slide mass and tighter lock-up, theoretically enhancing accuracy and reducing felt recoil. The lower profile also contributes to a compact vertical profile, though it results in reduced surface area for racking the slide—something new shooters often notice.

By contrast, the Beretta 92FS uses an open-top slide, a hallmark of its Walther P38 heritage. This design offers increased reliability in ejection and a lighter slide for faster cycling. While it provides excellent visibility and feed reliability—especially with hollow points—it lacks the full rail engagement of the CZ 75, making slide-to-frame fit less rigid under recoil.

Barrel Lockup: Linkless Cam vs Locking Block

The CZ 75 features a Browning-style linkless cam locking system, where the barrel tilts during cycling but remains fully supported during lockup. This is a proven, straightforward system that balances simplicity and reliability.

The Beretta 92, on the other hand, uses a falling locking block system, which keeps the barrel nearly horizontal through the firing cycle. This contributes to smoother feeding and reduced muzzle flip but adds complexity and introduces more moving parts, including the locking block itself, which is a known wear item over time.

Trigger System: DA/SA Operation with Diverging Safety Controls

Both pistols operate in double-action/single-action (DA/SA) mode, with a long, heavier first pull followed by shorter, lighter follow-ups. But how these systems are managed varies.

1. The CZ 75 (standard B model) uses a frame-mounted manual safety, which can only be engaged when the hammer is cocked. This allows for Condition One carry (cocked and locked), similar to a 1911.
2. The Beretta 92FS features a slide-mounted decocker/safety. Rotating the lever downward decocks the hammer and simultaneously puts the pistol on safe, requiring an upward flip to fire. This system is functional but controversial—some shooters inadvertently activate it while racking the slide under pressure.

This difference defines much of the user preference between the two. Some prefer the intuitive placement and function of a frame-mounted safety, while others value the decocking feature of the 92 for its perceived safety in administrative handling.

Comparison Table: Internal Mechanical Attributes

Feature	CZ 75 (Standard B Model)	Beretta 92FS
Slide Design	Internal (slide rides inside frame)	Open-top (slide rides outside frame)
Barrel Locking System	Linkless cam (Browning-style)	Falling locking block (Walther lineage)
Trigger Action	DA/SA with manual safety (cocked & locked)	DA/SA with slide-mounted decocker/safety
Safety Placement	Frame-mounted	Slide-mounted
Bore Axis	Moderate (not especially low)	Higher (due to slide and grip shape)
Trigger Reach (DA Mode)	2.75 inches	2.9 inches

 

Insight for DA/SA Enthusiasts

• If you prioritize slide control surface, decocking safety, and simple ejection, the Beretta 92’s engineering will appeal to you.
• If you want a tight slide fit, better dry-fire ergonomics, and cocked-and-locked carry, the CZ 75 offers a more classic defensive setup.

Ergonomics and Handling in the Hand

Grip Geometry, Control Placement, and Fit for Various Hands

Full-size DA/SA pistols demand precise consideration of grip architecture, trigger reach, and control access—especially for users balancing performance and carry suitability. The CZ 75 and Beretta 92FS approach ergonomics through different engineering strategies rooted in their respective design doctrines.

CZ 75: High Tang Grip and Palm-Support Geometry

The CZ 75 incorporates a full-length beavertail that supports a high-tang grip, enhancing recoil control by allowing the bore axis to sit closer to the shooter's hand. The grip frame features a sculpted palmswell, which fills the hand’s lower bout and promotes repeatable grip consistency under recoil. This design favors natural point-of-aim alignment, especially in rapid-fire strings.

The trigger reach in double-action mode measures approximately 2.75 inches, a dimension that allows for controlled first-shot mechanics without overextension for most users. Shooters with medium to smaller hands often find the geometry comfortable, particularly when fitted with slim profile grip panels. These reduce overall grip width to roughly 1.25 inches, narrowing the interface while maintaining structural integrity. Control levers, including the frame-mounted manual safety, are intuitively positioned for strong-hand thumb access without requiring grip shift.

Beretta 92FS: Broad Profile, Extended Reach, Ambidextrous Layout

The Beretta 92FS emphasizes surface area and ambidextrous usability. Its grip width measures approximately 1.5 inches, accommodating double-stack magazine dimensions and incorporating bilateral safety/decocker controls. The DA trigger reach is 2.9 inches, which can present challenges for shooters with shorter fingers, especially during initial trigger staging in double-action mode.

The 92FS grip angle and arc radius were engineered to ensure controllability for military-standard hand dimensions, but its circumference and reach often exceed ergonomic tolerances for smaller-handed users. Several upgrades, including short reach trigger bars, Vertec grip frames, and wraparound G10 grips, offer viable mitigation strategies.

Control interfaces are optimized for mirrored access. The slide-mounted safety/decocker provides ambidextrous redundancy but requires greater thumb reach to disengage. While not universally favored in high-stress manipulation, the configuration does meet NATO specifications for bilateral safety operation.

Ergonomic Fit by Hand Size

• Small to Medium Hands: 
  • CZ 75 with slim grips offers reduced reach and narrower profile
  • 92FS may require short reach kits or Vertec variant for optimal finger indexing
• Large Hands:
  • Both pistols offer sufficient surface area; Beretta 92FS provides broader grip volume for complete palm engagement
• Control Access:
  • CZ frame safety promotes natural manipulation without overextension
  • Beretta slide safety requires training for consistent disengagement under pressure

Accuracy and Recoil Control

Range Results, Bore Axis Physics, and Real-World Shooting Dynamics

Accuracy is not a single variable—it is the intersection of mechanical precision, trigger behavior, sight picture retention, and shooter interface. The CZ 75 and Beretta 92FS both meet professional standards in this category, but their mechanical design and dynamic recoil characteristics create distinct shooting signatures.

Bore Axis and Slide Mass: How Physics Influences Shot Recovery

The CZ 75’s slide-in-frame construction lowers the reciprocating mass above the shooter’s grip. While its bore axis is not objectively lower than striker-fired pistols like the Glock 17, the internal rail system concentrates slide mass closer to the recoil path.

This configuration reduces felt torque during cycling, improving muzzle stability in rapid follow-ups. The all-steel construction adds inertia, which contributes to smooth recoil tracking and minimal muzzle rise.

The Beretta 92FS’s open-top slide and locking block barrel reduce overall slide weight but raise the center of mass. Despite this, the 92FS maintains excellent shot-to-shot control through its consistent recoil impulse and wide grip surface, which disperses energy across the palm. Muzzle movement is slightly more vertical, particularly in fast strings, but remains manageable for shooters with proper grip mechanics.

Trigger Pull and Reset: Stock vs Tuned Feel

Double-action/single-action (DA/SA) systems require distinct evaluation of both modes. Out of the box, the CZ 75 offers a DA pull around 11 to 12 pounds, with a clean wall and gradual stack. The single-action pull averages 4.5 to 5 pounds, with a relatively short, audible reset. With Cajun Gun Works or CZ Custom Shop upgrades, both pull weight and reset length can be dramatically reduced. Tuned CZs are capable of sub-3.5 pound SA triggers with glass-rod break and sub-0.1" resets, making them highly competitive in USPSA and IDPA divisions.

The Beretta 92FS presents a DA pull of 11 to 13 pounds and a SA break between 5 to 6 pounds in factory form. The reset is tactile but longer than the CZ platform. Langdon Tactical Technology and Wilson Combat both offer performance trigger kits that smooth the pull curve, lighten DA to under 9 pounds, and sharpen SA break to competitive levels. The D spring conversion, in particular, is a common low-cost upgrade to reduce DA weight without sacrificing reliability.

Consistency Under Pressure: Practical Accuracy in Field Conditions

Both pistols demonstrate mechanical accuracy well within sub-2" groups at 25 yards from a benchrest with quality ammunition. From a functional standpoint, shooter accuracy is defined more by how the trigger interfaces with grip under stress. The CZ 75’s straighter trigger path and frame-mounted control architecture allow for deliberate finger placement and minimal shift in grip tension between DA and SA shots.

The 92FS requires careful management of its longer trigger reach and taller bore axis, particularly in rapid fire. However, for shooters who train regularly with the platform, follow-up shot consistency is excellent, aided by the pistol’s predictable recoil impulse and consistent sight re-alignment.

Expert Recommendation

• For competition and tuned performance:
  The CZ 75 offers a more modular trigger system and shorter reset potential with aftermarket upgrades.
• For duty use and field reliability:
  The Beretta 92FS is built around repeatable mechanics and balanced recoil control, with widely available parts and proven service track record.
• For cold bore to follow-up shots:
  Both platforms perform within professional standards, but shooters prioritizing reset speed and grip stability will benefit from the CZ’s internal slide mass and lower reciprocating profile.

Concealed Carry: Viability and Limitations

Are Either of These Classics Realistically EDC Pistols?

Carrying a metal-frame, double-stack, DA/SA handgun requires a deliberate evaluation of physical dimensions, carry weight, trigger reach under concealment, and holster compatibility. The CZ 75 and Beretta 92FS are engineered as duty-sized service pistols, yet their compact derivatives—such as the CZ P-01 and Beretta 92X Compact—narrow the gap between full-size capability and everyday carry practicality.

Carry Weight and Frame Profile Considerations

The full-size CZ 75 B weighs ~35 oz unloaded, while the Beretta 92FS comes in slightly lighter at ~34 oz. These weights increase to approximately 42 oz loaded, placing both at the upper end of CCW suitability for most carriers. While this weight contributes to shooting comfort and recoil absorption, it places a greater emphasis on holster fitment, belt stiffness, and distributed retention systems.

The CZ P-01, with its aluminum alloy frame, trims unloaded weight to 28 oz, offering a more viable CCW profile. Likewise, the Beretta 92X Compact, which uses a slim Vertec frame and shortened slide/barrel assembly, comes in around 27–28 oz unloaded.

Trigger Reach and Draw Efficiency

Drawing a DA/SA pistol from concealment demands a clear understanding of initial trigger reach and grip acquisition. The DA trigger press on both pistols requires full finger pad engagement without compromising grip tension.

• The CZ 75 Compact/P-01 maintains a 2.75-inch DA reach, favorable for users with medium or smaller hands.
• The 92X Compact, with a Vertec grip frame, shortens the traditional Beretta trigger arc from 2.9 to 2.7 inches, making it notably more accessible for CCW users.

Both pistols benefit from short-reach trigger bars and grip panel reduction kits, allowing shooters to configure the platform to their hand geometry and concealed draw mechanics.

Holster Fitment and Concealability Factors

For metal-frame pistols, holster construction becomes critical. Alien Gear Holsters, in particular, supports both the CZ 75 series and Beretta 92 with advanced polymer-core IWB systems like the Cloak Tuck 3.5 and ShapeShift. These platforms offer:

• Adjustable cant and ride height for optimized concealment
• Passive retention tuning for DA/SA manual safety configurations
• Compatibility with pistols equipped with rail-mounted lights (P-01, 92X Centurion)

Best IWB holster for CZ 75 Compact or P-01 searches consistently return hybrid systems with breathable backing and rigid shells, which help distribute the heavier mass of these pistols more comfortably.

CCW Comparison Table: Platform Dimensions and Weight

Model	Barrel Length	Unloaded Weight	Width	Trigger Reach (DA)
CZ 75 Compact	3.75 in	32 oz	1.4 in	2.75 in
CZ P-01	3.75 in	28 oz	1.4 in	2.75 in
Beretta 92FS	4.9 in	34 oz	1.5 in	2.9 in
Beretta 92X Compact	4.25 in	27.7 oz	1.4 in	2.7 in
Glock 19 Gen 5 (Reference)	4.02 in	23.6 oz	1.34 in	2.8 in

 

Professional Insight

While neither platform in full-size trim is ideal for minimal-profile CCW, compact derivatives like the CZ P-01 and Beretta 92X Compact offer excellent balance between metal-frame shootability and carry practicality.

When paired with a proper IWB holster—especially a model with adjustable retention and cant, such as those made by Alien Gear Holsters—both systems are viable for confident, consistent concealed carry.

Holster Compatibility and Aftermarket Support

Finding the Right Fit for Carry and Range Use

Precision shooting and confident carry depend on more than mechanical accuracy. For both CZ 75 and Beretta 92 owners, holster compatibility and upgrade infrastructure are essential to real-world use.

Matching platform dimensions to holster design, concealment strategy, and modularity expectations requires granular model awareness—especially when integrating IWB, OWB, or chest carry systems into your EDC loadout.

CZ 75 Holster Support at Alien Gear

Alien Gear CZ 75 Holsters provides a focused product line for the CZ 75 family, limited to the Cloak Series and non-light-bearing options.  

Supported CZ 75 Models:

Model	Supported Carry Types	Product Series
CZ 75 Full Size	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Hook & Loop	Cloak
CZ 75 B Full Size	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Hook & Loop	Cloak
CZ 75 Compact	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Hook & Loop	Cloak
CZ 75 B Compact	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Hook & Loop	Cloak
CZ 75 D PCR	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Hook & Loop	Cloak

 

For concealed carry users, the Cloak Tuck 3.5 IWB holster is a proven solution for full-metal pistols. It features adjustable passive retention, steel core reinforcement, and multi-point cant/ride height tuning to reduce grip printing and balance frame weight across the waistline.

This is particularly beneficial for the CZ 75’s longer slide and steel frame mass.

Beretta 92 Holster Ecosystem at Alien Gear

The Beretta 92 platform, including M9-based and rail-equipped variants, benefits from expanded support across both the Cloak and ShapeShift series, making it one of the most versatile fits in Alien Gear’s catalog. Light-bearing options are not supported, even for rail variants like the 92A1.

Supported Beretta 92 Models:

Model	Supported Carry Types	Product Series
Beretta 92 Full Size (M9)	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Drop Leg, Hook & Loop, Appendix	Cloak, ShapeShift
Beretta 92 Compact	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Drop Leg, Hook & Loop, Appendix	Cloak, ShapeShift
Beretta 92 Compact w/ Rail	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Drop Leg, Hook & Loop, Appendix	Cloak, ShapeShift
Beretta 92A1	IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Drop Leg, Hook & Loop, Appendix	Cloak, ShapeShift

ShapeShift support allows Beretta carriers to switch between multiple carry configurations using a single shell, streamlining EDC gear and training workflows. The ShapeShift Appendix, Paddle, and Drop Leg platforms offer advanced utility, particularly for range use, duty environments, or chest-mounted backcountry setups.

Optic and Sighting Configurations: Upgrade Viability

CZ 75 Series:

• Most models ship with fixed front and dovetail rear sights
• Optics mounting requires gunsmithing or aftermarket slides
• Limited co-witness or suppressor-height options available

Beretta 92 Series:

• 92FS includes integrated front sight, non-swappable
• 92A1 and newer models (e.g., 92X, M9A4) may offer dovetailed sights or optic-ready slides
• Beretta OEM, Langdon Tactical, and Wilson Combat supply upgraded internals and slide assemblies

Professional advisory: Confirm dovetail spec (e.g., Novak, proprietary Beretta cut) before investing in aftermarket night sights or target blades.

Expert Integration Notes

• CZ 75 users benefit most from Cloak Tuck 3.5 or Cloak Mod rigs tailored to heavier steel frames.  
• Beretta 92 users enjoy broader support, especially in compact and rail configurations, with seamless migration across IWB, OWB, chest, drop leg, and appendix carry setups.
• No light-bearing support is currently available from Alien Gear for either CZ 75 or Beretta 92 variants.

Structured Entity Summary

Brand	Series	Supported Holsters	Light Compatibility	Modular Shells
CZ 75	Full/Compact	Cloak (IWB, OWB, Paddle, Chest, Hook & Loop)	❌	❌
Beretta 92	FS/Compact/A1	Cloak & ShapeShift (full carry matrix)	❌	✅

 

What Do Shooters Ask Most About These Pistols?

Is the CZ 75 more accurate than the Beretta 92?

The CZ 75 often delivers better practical accuracy due to its internal slide rails, smooth single-action trigger, and slightly lower bore axis. These features improve shot recovery and follow-up consistency. Both pistols are mechanically sound, but the CZ 75 offers a more stable shooting platform for precision.

Which DA/SA pistol has better ergonomics: Beretta 92 or CZ 75?

Most shooters find the CZ 75 more ergonomic, thanks to its sculpted palmswell, high beavertail, and slimmer grip profile. It fits small to medium hands better than the Beretta 92, which has a wider grip and longer trigger reach, especially in DA mode.

Is the Beretta 92 easier to clean than the CZ 75?

Yes. The Beretta 92’s open-top slide and locking block system simplify disassembly and maintenance. The CZ 75’s enclosed slide and internal frame rails offer excellent accuracy but require more attention when cleaning and lubricating.

Is the CZ 75 good for self defense?

Yes. The CZ 75 is a highly reliable, accurate, and durable handgun. Its compact variants—like the P-01 and PCR—are particularly well-suited for concealed carry, offering lighter weight with the same DA/SA performance and robust construction.

Can you conceal carry a Beretta 92FS comfortably?

It’s possible, but the 92FS is a large pistol and requires a dedicated holster system and a quality gun belt. For easier concealment, models like the Beretta 92 Compact or 92X Centurion are better options due to reduced length and grip circumference.

Why is the CZ 75 so popular among enthusiasts?

The CZ 75 is celebrated for its all-steel frame, excellent trigger feel, low recoil, and unmatched out-of-the-box ergonomics. It's widely used in competition shooting, law enforcement, and civilian carry for its reliability and smooth shooting experience.

Is the CZ 75 better than a Glock?

Each has its advantages. The CZ 75 excels in trigger feel, recoil control, and ergonomics. Glocks are lighter, simpler to maintain, and more modular. Shooters focused on range precision and comfort often prefer the CZ 75, while Glock appeals for its minimalism and aftermarket support.

What military or police forces use the CZ 75?

The CZ 75 and its variants have been adopted by law enforcement and military units in the Czech Republic, Chile, Egypt, and select special operations units across Europe and Asia. Its reliability has led to widespread international use, especially of the P-01 and SP-01 models.

What are the advantages of the Beretta 92 over the CZ 75?

The Beretta 92 offers easier field maintenance, broader aftermarket grip and holster compatibility, and factory ambidextrous controls. For left-handed shooters or those prioritizing modularity, the 92 platform is often more flexible, especially in the 92X and M9A4 configurations.

What’s the difference between the Beretta 92FS and 92X?

The 92X series improves on the 92FS with a Vertec-style grip (straighter and slimmer), dovetail front sights, and optics-ready options on some models. These changes enhance customization, allow red dot mounting, and make the platform more modern without sacrificing its core reliability.

Final Verdict: CZ 75 vs Beretta 92 – Proven Platforms, Distinct Strengths

Both the CZ 75 and Beretta 92 represent decades of refinement in full-size, hammer-fired 9mm pistols. Each platform has proven itself in combat, law enforcement, and civilian use through consistency, durability, and shooter confidence.

The CZ 75 stands out for its ergonomic grip geometry, internal frame-slide design, and controllable recoil—particularly appreciated by competitive shooters and those seeking refined handling. Its all-steel construction, excellent single-action trigger feel, and high mechanical accuracy make it a favorite among those who prioritize precision and traditional craftsmanship.

The Beretta 92, on the other hand, excels in accessibility, field maintainability, and modular platform support. Its broader holster compatibility, ambidextrous controls, and ease of disassembly make it a dependable choice for duty applications and high-round-count users. The evolution of the 92 series into modern variants like the 92X and M9A4 ensures continued relevance through optics support, grip modifications, and enhanced sight systems.

There is no objectively superior pistol—only the one that best matches your requirements for fit, performance, and mission profile. Whether you favor the mechanical elegance of the CZ 75 or the battle-proven versatility of the Beretta 92, both remain benchmark examples of DA/SA handgun engineering.

Test both platforms, evaluate your priorities, and select the one that runs best in your hands.