A dedicated customer base will let a company know what they desire in future products. At that point, you will see one of two things happen. The company will either listen fully and apply all the changes appropriately or the company will go their own way. There are two sub-categories to the latter. The company will apply changes in their own manner or not at all.
With that said, Česká Zbrojovka’s P-10 series of handguns are everything that the Glock should have been, when they dropped the Generation-4 line, nearly a decade ago. You can go to any Glock post on Facebook and see a laundry list full of simple changes that dedicated buyers would like to see. I chose the CZ P-10C Suppressor-Ready variant to replace my Glock-19 for concealed carry. This, after I found the right holster for everyday carry. I am hoping that G-Code Holsters expands either the Phenom or INCOG series of IWB holsters soon to include the P-10.
The P-10C Suppressor-Ready is boxed with two extended 17-round magazines (15+2 with the enlarged base-plates), multiple back-straps, cleaning kit and lock, and owner’s manual as most other firearms come with. Spare magazines are slightly spendy, coming in over $30 a piece. Locally, you’ll likely see them around $45.
The ergonomics are where the P-10C goes the distance against the Glock. The controls are fully-ambidextrous without the option either being omitted completely (slide stop) or having to be swapped (magazine release). Both controls are enlarged, but still refined and contoured enough that they do not hang-up on clothing. On the Glock, many people enlarge both controls. On the SIG P320, it lacks full ambidextrous controls, but I haven’t had an issue with needing to enlarge them. On the flip side of the P320 coin, the original grip was good, but the X-Carry grip was unmatched by comparison.
The magazine releases are smaller than on the Glock Gen-4 line, but shapelier: angled in such a way that you can press from below to engage a release as easily as from the side directly. The slide stop / releases are twice the size of the Glock’s. The top of both sides protrude away from the firearm for ease of manipulation: providing a shelf that the thumb will press down on when dropping the slide in that manner. Finally, because the takedown is identical to a Glock, the takedown levers are larger on the P-10C.
Grip is assured with the P-10C, to put it simply. The grip texture is best described as spiked. I have encountered no slippage while shooting the handgun. It is a highly aggressive texture and may cause discomfort or abrasions to dehydrated skin during prolonged strings of fire. A test of usage with electrical / skater tape lessened the abrasiveness without permanently altering the grip and without any loss of grip. The pattern is more abrasive at the front and back compared to the sides. The frame also has stippled points for thumb placement, when the combat grip is utilized, but I do feel that those points could have been as abrasive as the front and rear of the grip.
Furthermore, the P-10C feels like a full-size handgun. Comparing the Glock-17 and Glock-19, the G17 feels better in the hand and the P-10C better still. The grip on the Glock-19 feels like a brick with a hunched-back. The trigger guard doesn’t feature a proper undercut where the middle finger rests and the beavertail is nearly nonexistent. When drawing under duress, you may experience slide bite due to that. The P-10C’s grip is slightly deceptive due to the depth of grip that can be obtained. The undercut and the beavertail are deeper and makes the handgun feel as if it has a lower bore axis than it does. The slide isn’t any taller than the 9mm Glocks, but it’s the suppressor sights that produce the deception. Overall, the handgun fits in the hand far more naturally. The good thing about the beavertail is that, unless you have a set of gorilla hands, you’re not likely to catch slide-bite the way that you will with a Glock. I like to be able to ride my handgun a little higher or have a lower bore-axis to compensate for recoil.
The slide is emblazoned with properly angled slide serrations. The depth of these serrations is not too shallow and not too deep. They are slightly deeper than what can be found on the rear of Glock slides. Unlike the serrations on the Glock, they cover nearly fifty-percent of the length of the slide and are angled for proper manipulations.
As this variant is marketed for suppressed usage, the handgun does come with the appropriately raised suppressor-height sights. They are Tritium three-dots for night-time shooting. They do not clear the AAC Ti-Rant 9mm suppressor (AAC has updated the can line as the Ti-Rant 9M) that I regularly utilize and instead heighten evenly with the top of the can. The rear sight would work well as an emergency slide racker if the shooter was injured.
As for the trigger. It’s as simple as this. It’s not the lightest, but it is one of the smoother stock triggers on the market. It is not squishy, gritty and it does have a problem with creeping or stepping. While my Glock-19 does not exhibit these issues either, it feels several ounces heavier.
“Show me a guy who says Glocks are perfect and I’ll show you a guy with a modified Glock.”
That was a quote from YouTube commenter, martinitime1975, on the GarandThumb CZ P-10C review video. More on this point in a moment. An interesting note is that GT’s P-10C is in the same serial number range as the Omaha Outdoors gun, but he never mentioned having any of the problems. Furthermore, he did make note of this when commenting on the Omaha Outdoors video. Understandably, the “Great Lord” GarandThumb was focused on addressing Larry Vickers in this video.
So, the point of the quote. My P-10C came out to around $520, after taxes, from one of my local FFLs. I’ve paid just under $600, as a civilian with no discounts from FFLs, for several of my Glocks. Considering the additional ergonomic features that you receive in the P-10C versus the Glock and you’ll wonder why these things haven’t been standard on the Glock for decades.
The only semi-legitimate complaint that might be uttered by some is that the takedown in the same at the Glock — specifically the fact that you must pull the trigger to disassemble it. My rebuttal, to that point, is to get four of your good friends to come over, during every disassembly, to visually verify that the firearm is unloaded prior to the disassembling. If you’re really that worried about it…
The fact that Glock hasn’t answered the numerous calls, for these simple ergonomic changes, has spawned a plethora of companies specifically in the business of custom modifications for Glocks. Agency Arms, JagerWerks, Wilson Combat, and Zev Technologies are just a few of the companies recommended for Glock custom work. The cost of just a slide modification package, which will nearly match the P-10’s stock slide, you ask? That would be $250 minimum, on average.
Initially, I was concerned about a previous issue with the CZ P-10C. Omaha Outdoors brought forth information on striker rotation inside the channel. It would prevent the firearm from going into battery, cause failures to reset in the trigger during firing (when in battery), and subsequently causing failures to fire. Their firearm was an earlier C-series (20000-range) serial number and mine is also a C-series (60000-range). There are a few distinct differences between the older guns and the newer ones. Some internal changes and differences in the markings. Luckily, I did not suffer any of the issues that Omaha Outdoors highlighted.
The problem was in the striker channel components. The striker, upon the P-10 being fired, had a tendency to slide side-to-side. Due to this misalignment, the firing mechanism would fail upon the next trigger pull. This, assuming the slide was fully in battery. Occasionally, the striker assembly would be slid aside far enough to catch on the components in the grip housing and stop the slide coming into full battery. Fortunately, due to misalignment, I haven’t seen any cases of out-of-battery detonation.
ON THE RANGE
Often, the manufacturer will highlight a break-in round-count for their product in the manual. It was something that I had forgotten about until I began shooting the P-10C. The first five-magazines of 115-grain rounds held nothing but stove-pipes / FTEs. The casings failed-to-eject and was likely due to a stiff recoil spring. A quick swap to 124-grain ammunition helped immensely, but due to a low number of rounds, I was forced to switch back to 115-grain. Slowly but surely, more rounds went downrange without any failures. The shell casings weren’t being slung clear early on. It looked as if a child was trying to learn how to throw a ball. The P-10C didn’t fare as well suppressed. While running 147-grain rounds, to guarantee the soundest suppression, I saw minimal slide cycle. The firearm was effectively single-shot and I quit wasting subsonic ammunition.
An actual break-in period is something that I haven’t ever encountered with any of my other handguns. Straight out of the boxes, those handguns were ready to go with no or very minimal issues. But these issues did not persist and with the regular use of 115-grain ammunition over the course of the first day, the P-10C was broken in. Roughly 150-rounds were required to get through the break-in.
I estimate a round count of 2,800 through the P-10C (by the time of the publication of this online article). The majority was in 115-grain split between CCI Blazer and Remington UMC ammunition. A limited amount of Winchester Target ammunition was also used, but purposefully sidelined due to previous issues in my Glocks. I do not recommend this loose packed ammunition for use. The majority of the 124-grain ammo was Remington UMC, as well. The 147-grain was exclusively Speer Lawman TMJ.
The CZ P-10C Suppressor-Ready variant comes equipped with three-dot Tritium sights and is complimented by an extremely efficient trigger. At least, with my example, it is right up there with what I’ve seen in in the Springfield XD and Canik TP9 series of handguns. The trigger is very smooth, with a slight springy sound to the take-up, but the break is rather loud. The reset is just as audible, as well. Over the course of time, it will likely fine-tune itself as parts wear. The trigger has a flatter and thinner profile than a Glock’s and is an improved feature. Over time, it will wear as well as my concealed handgun’s has.
A very interesting and consistent feature in the P-10 comes up during the reloads. Upon reloading with a fresh magazine, with enough force, the slide will fall forward automatically upon the magazine being seated. I don’t know this feature to be a factor on any other handgun and, thus, it was extremely surprising to have occur. If seconds matter, you can learn the required amount of pressure to consistently drop the slide when reloading.
Later on, shooting with the 147-grain Speer resumed and better results were had. The Speer was consistently high, by an inch, at ten-yards and there were no fliers that couldn’t be attributed to the user. The dull thud of those rounds in the dirt was a pleasant thing to hear. On occasion, there would be a round that was supersonic within the fifty-yard berm. Overall, a pleasurable experience with a suppressor.
Since the release of the P-10C and very recently, there have been additional variants released in the P-10 line. There is now a Full- and Subcompact-size, as well as Optics-Ready variant. Both models also come in suppressor-ready variants. The P-10s also come in four different color schemes.
Now, what I would like to see is a P-10C OR, Suppressor Ready. In the earlier P-10C layout. That being, the features remain fully-ambidextrous. What really irks me is the fact that CZ-USA removed the fully-ambidextrous magazine release. The part that the early P-10Cs are fully-ambidextrous. I cannot confirm if they changed the latest P-10Cs over to hold the non-ambi magazine release, though. Instead, it’s reversible like on most other semi-automatic, polymer handguns.
I view this as a step backwards for the evolution of the P-10. Between the back-straps and the different sizes of variants, I don’t think anybody would have a problem with agreeing that the controls are always within reach, regardless of hand size. I view it as a very important piece of the puzzle when it comes to user-ability. If there’s a need to swap hands, or if a wound forces the issue, the older layout works perfectly. This, assuming the user has consistently trained themselves into the habit of opposite- / weak-hand operation of the P-10. But, the disappointment only comes on the latest models, from my understanding. As for the changes being added to standard P-10C handguns; it’s unclear to me.
I have no complaints with the P-10C that can’t be fixed with a little end-user maintenance. I would only consider adding an optic to it for a little additional speed in target acquisition and follow-up shots. It will likely be one of the Dual-Illuminated Trijicon RMRs: to eliminate the need for batteries. Additionally, I believe it would be awesome to procure a SilencerCo Omega 9K suppressor for it. It simply depends on how I, or you, want to outfit a rig. It would be easy to get it milled, but how hard would it be to build the right platform (an additional firearm) for a little more money. It’s all in how you look at it for your own needs.
Overall, I give high marks to CZ for their work in the P-10C handgun and hope to see this line of sidearms evolve further into the future. Especially if they took what we saw from the finalization of the Army’s Modular Handgun System Program. I’d certainly like to see if CZ can evolve the P-10 to outperform the SIG M17/M18 variants of the P320.
If you would like to see more firearms related material, then visit us on Facebook.
Questions or comments? Email firstname.lastname@example.org.