My buddy and I compared our firearms this morning. I've had the Canik for several months and he just bought the 2.0, with a 4" barrel. We didn't shoot them at the range, just compared and dry fired. Both guns are roughly the same size, but the slide on the 2.0 is a bit lower. I guess you can say a lower bore axis. The difference in weight was an ounce or two in favor of the 2.0. The fit and finish of both is excellent period. The Canik has ambi slide releases which are larger and has a loaded chamber indicator and striker indicator on the back. The 2.0 has a witness hole on the top. The Canik grip texture is not as good as the 2.0 in my humble opinion. But, the trigger on the Canik is like a 9 out of 10, and the 2.0 maybe a 6.5-7. The 2.0 trigger is not bad, but has a longer take up, a not as crisp trigger break, and a longer reset that isn't very audible. The Canik trigger is much, much better. Even my buddy agreed. I'm not putting the 2.0 down, its a great firearm. I just like my Canik better for the features, trigger, and what you get for $330. The Canik came with a nice hinged plastic box and an extra back strap. It only came with one magazine though. My buddy paid $540 for his 2.0 new and it came in a card board box with 3 extra back straps and 2 magazines. There ya go, the best I can do on a comparison without firing the guns.