Not to my knowledge.

I don't think Tanfo makes any decocker models at all right now (or at least none are imported by EAA). While the Tanfo design is based on the CZ, the internals have evolved separately and do not interchange, so it's not like you could try to use parts from a D-model CZ.

It is not possible to convert a proper CZ, either - I've been told the frames are different, so you can't put a safety in a D model or a decocker in a safety-equipped model. (Never owned a BD, nor had one torn apart, so I can't comment on specifics.)

Now, the awful Omega models can be swapped - it's their one and only "advantage", which is offset by what are, IMO, two very big disadvantages.

The first problem is that the "simplification" of the system has made it far less robust. The Omegas use a single-sided trigger bow with a spring that is barely captive in the frame; the spring has to be staked in place, and even then it can still come loose. (This is a definite problem, and has happened to numerous people. It should be noted that if the spring does come out, you are left with a pistol that doesn't function - not so great if you are using it for serious purposes.) The traditional design uses a double-sided trigger bow that is a single piece all the way around the grip frame (complete coverage, akin to a 1911 trigger bow). Its spring (which is also thicker in diameter) wraps around the front and is held in place by a screw of reasonable size. The ejector on the Omega is a separate piece, and is specifically used for detailed take-down (almost as if it were a takedown lever). The traditional 75 has the ejector as part of the single-piece sear cage. Though I've not heard reports of the Omega ejector being a problem, I would consider it more likely to give problems than the traditional design.

The second problem is that the redesign of the FCG means that you will never, ever be able to get an Omega trigger anywhere close to the level of quality of a traditional 75 trigger. The FPB lifter on the Omega is between the trigger bar and the sear, so (a) removing the FPB is meaningless, since you can't get rid of the lifter, (b) it's impossible to get all of the pre-travel out, as part of the pre-travel is moving the lifter before any contact whatsoever is made with the sear, and (c) it's impossible to get a reset like even a FPB-equipped traditional model, since you have a substantial amount of movement to reset the lifter even after the sear is reset. (In a normal 75B, the extra travel isn't too far, and you can remove the FPB and FPB lifter if you want to get reset really short - or buy a model that doesn't have a FPB, like a Shadow or 85C. The extra travel required in a normal 75B to reset the lifter - after resetting the sear - is significantly less than that required for an Omega.)



The only real thing the Omega brings to the table is the ability to swap safety to decocker and vice-versa. To me, that's not really an advantage anyway - just buy the configuration you want. I don't see people changing the manual-of-arms like that with any degree of regularity; it doesn't make sense to.

Some argue that the Omega system is "simpler" and easier to access. Having torn down CZs dozens of times, I would say the Omega system really doesn't provide any great benefit there. The greater tunability and robustness of the traditional setup is definitely worth the tiny, itty-bitty extra effort required for a detail strip.

As I said, it is not possible to convert any proper CZ in either direction.

This is stated by many competent CZ-smiths. I believe it is due to differences in the frames to accept either the safety lever or the decocker lever. I can't personally comment, as I have not owned or otherwise detail-stripped a BD.

ETA:

From Angus & crew at CZC: