Opinions? I'm getting ready to order one or the other... I've never shot the CZ, I have shot the M77. I have heard good things about the CZ - I like the hogsback stock. Which one requires less additional work? I've heard the CZ needs work (bedding, crossbolts) to bring it up to par - what about the M77?

The safety on the model 77 in the rear position is hard to get a hold of. The trigger is also so/so. I don't beleive they are bedded either. The recoil pads are fair. I am being highly critical though. I'm looking to buy a M77 African in .375 Ruger in the near future. I will definitely have the trigger done and either add some to the safety to make it easier to get a hold of or have a new safety machined. Because the gun fits me so well I'm going to wait to see how the recoil is before I mess with the butt pad if at all. That said the sights on the African are the best/fastest open sights I've ever seen. The Mark II's sights are good, but not as good as the African. The Mark II fits me well enough. The African fits me like a glove!!!! The African is a perfect weight for a .375. In .375 the Mark II's are WAY to heavy for my taste, but in the .416 they may be fine.

I don't believe the CZ's are bedded as well. The CZ's sights are comparable to the Mark II. I hate the stocks though. They are huge and bulky. It's like they made one stock designed for their offering in .505 Gibbs and fitted barreled actions from .375 to .505 on it. The trigger is better out of the box than the Rugers. I'm not a fan of the fit of the stock to me regardless of its bulkyness. It also has a 2 position safety which isn't the end of the world, but I prefer a 3 position safety. In .375 the CZ's are WAY to heavy for my taste. In .416 I don't know.

Gunsmiths can attone for a lot of sins, so probably the biggest thing is finding the one that fits you the best. This was hardly the last word. Just my observations when considering both manufacturers in .375 calibre.

Brett

I have owned one of each in 416 Rigby. I don't like the Ruger stock shape,bolt handle nor safety. I slimmed and reshaped the stock,put on longer straight bolt handle and tried to live with the safety as I could think of no real way to modify it. In the final analysis I sold the Ruger to a memeber of this forum and he promptly went to Africa and took an Elephant with it. I took the CZ and did the same. You pays your money and makes your choice. Both were exceptionally accurate rifles. I did not like the exceptionally heavy barrel of the Ruger and don't think the quarter rib to be very attractive either. The barrel was cut to 21" on the CZ 550 and a Brockman laminated stock installed and bolt handle was starightened.To me the CZ is hands down the better rifle and the price is certainly right. If mine had had one of the current American stocks I would have not restocked it.

I purchased the Ruger from Zimbabwe as he mentioned above. I also had a CZ in .416 Rigby with the hogback stock. I sold the CZ and kept Zimbabwe's modified Ruger. I love the Ruger! It has now accounted for 3 elephant, a couple cape buff, and assorted plains game. The Ruger won't be leaving my gun safe for anything other than another safari!

As you can see, it is all a matter of personal preference. I thought the CZ was too bulky, especially in the magazine area, and it seemed to hit me (recoil) twice as hard as the Ruger with the same loads. My CZ had the set trigger, which was phenomenal, but I really wasn't sure I wanted a set trigger on a DG rifle. It did aid in long range shooting tremendously. The Ruger is clearly more expensive from the factory, and worth the difference in price in my opinion. The CZ doesn't have the same level of fit and finish. To each his own....

Bill

I also have both, & easily pick the Ruger over the CZ. I've shot buffalo with the Ruger, but not the CZ. Still, I'll keep both as they both represent very good value compared to a custom big bore.

I have the CZ American in 416 Rigby. Before I made my purchase decision I went to a Cabelas that had both in stock and compared them side by side. The stock on the CZ fit me better.

The CZ needed some tweaking...rough action, trigger adjustment, new from sight. But, I like doing that stuff.

FWIW, my rifle came with dual crossbolts and both recoil lugs were bedded with a material that looks like Brownell's steel bedding compound.

Either rifle should serve you well, get what you like!

I have several bolt Rugers.Fair enough rifles.
My CZ 416 Rigby is a great rifle.It needs work but you will have a Safari rifle when finished.The safety does need changing,it can be accidently snicked on when operating the bolt quickly.Several different fixes can be found with a forum search.The Rugers can let you down in the feeding department when the SHT fan.
Miles McCallum of CM safaris has stopped using his against elephant for that reason.

Wombat,

I hunted with Miles McCallum in Dande North in 2005.

He carried the Ruger then and used handloads of 410 grain Woodleigh FMJ's.

Do yo have any more information on the incident or incidents that caused him to abandon the Ruger?

I am curious what he replaced it with?

Andy

The new CZ Kevlar stock is much trimmer than the wood. Tip Burns is presently changing my wood stocked CZ 416 over to the new Kevlar.

Very accurate rifle and I like the safety position better than the Ruger and the trigger seems to be fine as well.

Butch

I have had both in .416 Rigby. I had the CZ and shot a friends Ruger. I immediately traded the CZ for a Ruger .416. To my thinking it has better sights, better fit (less recoil), better trigger (neather trigger is up to par) and just looks better. Both are accurate.

I guess my advice is weigh the cost of getting each rifle the way you want it and then make your choice.

Tom