Externaly they look about the same, I would like to hear opinions. I think the CZ is wider since it's 40 can carry 12 rounds, instead of 10. Also any CCW perspectives would be nice.

i have not fired a bhp so my opinions of it are solely from fondling a few different ones.  they are wider, or at least seem much wider, than the cz75.  i think they are way too wide for a double stack 9mm.

Go 9mm.

CZ-75B

15+1 standard
DA/SA
Trigger takes some minor getting used too, mine has never failed in my hands and only twice in others.  Those others were amateurs my mom and my buddy (USAF cop no less) I suspect limpwristing on both.
$349-450


BHP
13+1  standard
SA only
Mags are cheaper if you have a browning or clone.  FN HPs have their own mags and are not compatible.
$500-700


Aside though for the money you cannot top a CZ.  BHPs I have seen in competition have a tendency to jam.  Also buy a >>>CZESKA ZBROJOVKA<<<.

Quoted: <snip> Mags are cheaper if you have a browning or clone.  FN HPs have their own mags and are not compatible.

A Browning HiPower and a FN HiPower are fully compatible right down to the mags.  They are the same gun, with different roll-marks.  That's all.

The HiPower has a shorter reach for the trigger than the CZ 75B and the grip length is shorter, too.  Both are quality firearms, but I prefer the double-action of the CZ.  But I will not be selling any of my three HiPowers soon, either.  :)

--
Mike

I prefer my CZ to the Hi Power I had but think the Hi Power is a fantastic pistol. If you do not mind singleaction only then the Hi Power is a great choice. I like the double action and the shape of the grip on the CZ and the price and quality.

Quoted: I prefer my CZ to the Hi Power I had but think the Hi Power is a fantastic pistol. If you do not mind singleaction only then the Hi Power is a great choice. I like the double action and the shape of the grip on the CZ and the price and quality.

Ditto for me. As a matter of fact, I sold my Hi-Power to finance my CZ75B (40 S&W) and some reloading compnonents.

The CZ does not have the reputation for biting the hand that feeds it.  I no longer own any BHPs, but I still have a CZ and carry it every day.  100K+ rounds and counting.

I wouldn't get either in 40 if that's what you're thinking.  I've seen too many problems discussed with the 40 CZ-75s over on the CZ forums for my taste and the impressions I've gotten from disscusions of the BHP in 40 turned me off as well, but I'm no expert on it.  I'd get a SIG P229 if I wanted 40 (it was made for 40), or better yet start saving up for a Colt 1911 and just skip 40 altogether, that's what I did in the end.

I have both the CZ and BHP in 9mm and like the CZ better.  The ergonomics just work, significantly better for me, e.g. longer trigger reach on the CZ is better and the thumb safety is just too far back on the BHP, which makes a big difference for me.  I like the fact the the CZ can be carried with the hammer down for a double action first trigger (like a SIG) or cocked and locked.  

Both carry real well because of their thin front ends.  

I have both n 9MM and I also prefer shooting the CZ over the BHP .  took a long time of practicing with the BHP to shoot it as accurately as the CZ . (Incidentally I got both for a combined price of $700 a couple of years ago )

Quoted: Quoted: <snip> Mags are cheaper if you have a browning or clone.  FN HPs have their own mags and are not compatible. A Browning HiPower and a FN HiPower are fully compatible right down to the mags.  They are the same gun, with different roll-marks.  That's all. The HiPower has a shorter reach for the trigger than the CZ 75B and the grip length is shorter, too.  Both are quality firearms, but I prefer the double-action of the CZ.  But I will not be selling any of my three HiPowers soon, either.  :) -- Mike

I would not go quite that far, but Mike is on the right track.

-both locking systems are the brain-children of the great John Browning.

-both are strong, though in IPSC/USPSA use, the browning (of all countries) has been found to often crack - particularly with the powerful ammo we use. CZ and Tanfoglios hold up fine.

-the BHP has a mag safety that f--ks up the trigger pull.

-most BHPs are SA only and they have really small safeties. Most CZs are traditional SA/DA though they make a Single action for target work and a de-cocker model.

The CZ is really a refinement of the BHP concept.

Overall. I think the CZ is MORE gun for LESS money. For CCW, look at the 9mm P-01 or the .40 cal 85 Compact (possibly re-named the 75 compact) or the RAMI in .40.

CBR/ AKA TY 44934 on czforum.com and on www.czshooters.com

I used to own a couple of HPs, but I did not like the trigger. I didn't like SA only guns. I like the trigger on the 75BD better. The HPs did feed everything I gave them with no issues, however.