Makarov or CZ-82?

[Willie D]

I'd like to pick up either a Bulgarian Makarov or a CZ(VZ)-82. Price is around $250 for each.



I really like the slim profile and simplicity of the Mak but I assume it is probably a rougher shooting gun. The lower capacity doesn't bother me. I also like that it has a decocker.

The CZ is probably a better, more modern design. The worn paint finish kind of looks like crap and it might be a little harder to conceal but I've heard the trigger is better. How difficult/pricey is an at home refinish?



What are your opinions on each? I kind of feel like the Makarov is a commie classic that would look nice next to my AK but the CZ-82 would probably look equally nice next to a Pilsner Urquell.

[Noah_Zark]

I own both. Some of my Makarovs get exercised frequently; I haven't fired one of the CZ82s in YEARS.

The reason: The trigger of the CZ is very wide, and the front of the pad of my trigger finger gets caught between the side of the trigger and the back of the trigger opening. Ouch.

I have to place the first joint of my trigger finger centered on the trigger to keep from "pushing" shots to the left. The same is true for the Mak. But the narrow trigger of the Mak has NEVER pinched my finger.

I do not find the Mak a "rough shooting" gun at all. In fact, most people to whom I introduce a Makarov find it easy to shoot and fairly accurate.

Do yourself a favor and ask the seller if you can dry fire both weapons, sighting on some spot on the floor or carpet, and watch if the sight picture changes in SA mode and see if the trigger on the CZ pinches your finger.

Also, don't be freaked out if you look down the CZ's barrel and see a smoothbore. Most CZ82s (not all!) have polygonal rifling. Look closely and you'll see five "shadows" evenly spaced around the ID of the bore.

Best,

Noah

[39flathead]

I own both, and the CZ is my choice of the two simply due to the "normal" magazine release.

I shoot both regularly and the Mak is a bit sharper in the recoil dept, but not "rough" IMO by any means, but in all honesty, for me to consider a gun rough to shoot, we need to start talking about .500 Linebaugh, ect...

As for the CZ finish, I have one that was parkerized and it suits me just fine.

Nothing wrong with either gun, I am guessing your final decision will come down to simply which one sizewise feels best in your hand.

[PA Rifleman]

I'd like to pick up either a Bulgarian Makarov and a CZ(VZ)-82. Price is around $250 for each.

...

Slight text change, problem fixed. Solution: buy both, try to resist buying duplicates.

...

Also, don't be freaked out if you look down the CZ's barrel and see a smoothbore. Most CZ82s (not all!) have polygonal rifling. Look closely and you'll see five "shadows" evenly spaced around the ID of the bore.

Noah is correct, here's what he's referring to:

-- -- -- -- --

[mak47]

I own both and both have their place.

Pros for CZ:
The CZ is more accurate. A lot more accurate.
Higher capacity than Makarov.
I find it more ergonomic.
Zero failures in over 1000 rounds.
Though it is slightly thicker, it is lighter than Makarov.
Spring loaded firing pin--slam fires extremely unlikely

Pros for Makarov:
Thinner than CZ
Much nicer looking than CZ (Blued, not chipped paint)
Decocking safety lever
Zero failures in over 1000 rounds
Fewer parts=less likely to break down
Cheaper, more readily available magazines

The end result is that you should buy both, but if you have to choose one to buy first, I'd go with the Makarov.

Mak's haven't been readily available in surplus for a while now, and until recently were selling for between $300-$400, even for the Bulgy's. It's impossible to know how long the current crop will last and they're reasonably priced so I'd grab one now while they're plentiful.

All the surplus dealers who sell CZ-82's make regular practice of saying "this is the last shipment of these", but another shipment always seems to come in soon after. They will certainly run out eventually, but who knows when. That combined with the ugly looking condition of most of them is a virtual guarantee that there will always be a decent number of them floating around used for reasonable prices.

[Ecclectic Collector]

+ rep to you Mak47.

I bought two CZ-82 pistols, plus I have a Baikal Makarov. Have shot both extensively. I like the ergonamics more on the CZ, the simplicity of the Makarov. Both shoot very well and are recommended buys.

I have had a problem with one of my CZ pistols. The slide stop spring broke on mine (my fault), and the CZ is a real bi*** to get apart and back together again. Anyway, CZ-USA gladly sold me a new spring, and after getting it back in place my spare pistol is working just fine again.

As for the finish on the CZ: I refinished one of mine by first carefully scraping all the flaky paint finish off, then after lightly polishing it, reblued using 44-40 cold blue. The CZ took the blue very well and after a year, still is holding the finish well.

Frankly both are great little guns. I'd give a slight nod to the Makarov simply because it is simpler and has more historic interest, plus you can fit custom grips to a Makarov, while if the Cz doesn't fit your hand your are sort of SOL.

[Fetus]

I would get the regular Bulgarian .

the only thing I like about the CZ82 is the magazine size .

[Dave_n]

I have two CZ82s and an EG Makarov. All excellent and accurate pistols (out ot 10 metres). If you can find an EG Makarov, I would recommend it. Much better made, but you will be paying ~$400. Upside, both are then C&R. Dave_n

[ronhoffman2]

I have an old Mak. Was my first pistol purchased when i turned 21, 14 years ago. It is very accurate and never had a fail. A great first gun, starter gun, or car gun (i keep mine in my truck). I always recommend it when people ask.

[mpi]

i have maks from every country that made and exported them.

the mak is more robust and less complicated, and the CZ has a replacement parts issue. like almost none are available.