In the market for a new rifle to add to the collection. When I bought my last new gun, I did check out a CZ 550, as they had one in the caliber I wanted (6.5 x55), but the action seemed REALLY rough (sloppy and binding). Took me about 10 seconds to hand it back to the clerk. Even she admitted that it was bad. I'm sure this was an exception rather than the rule, but please enlighten me as to why one would buy a CZ as opposed to the myriad of other bolt guns out there in the same price range.

Thanks in advance for your answer.

You got me.....

I would do without before spending money on one myself.

The Cz offers a Mauser-type, controlled-feed (CF) action at a manageable price. If you want CF as opposed to push feed (PF) such as Remington 700 it is a good option. I have a Cz American in 6.5x55 and don't have problems with the sloppy action you mention. I also just like the looks of the rifle. Mine shoots quite well although I am sure it is not up to bench rest standards. If you are happy with PF and don't consider CF a value then I think they are still competitively priced with other similar rifles on the market.

The CZ is a way into a CRF Mauser-clone rifle without the expense, particularly in the large calibers. Some buy them, then have them trued and slicked up by a competent gunsmith, like Wayne at AHR. For regular calibers, I believe there are better options.

Cz-USA does have a published five year warranty. I don't know that Ruger or Winchester offer any in writing.

Don't know my CZ527 Varmint in 223 is the most accurate out of the box rifle I've ever owned, sub 1 inch at 200... My 452 in 22LR has produced 1 inch groups with the right ammo and calm days at 100. Then again, I've had both rifles since their intro here, maybe quality fell off as popularity increased?

sns2---I have a cz550 in 6.5x55 and it is the most consistently accurate factory rifle I have ever owned. I love it!

Don't know what to think about the one you handled...my action is tight and slick, and there have never been any feeding issues either.. I would not hesitate to buy another CZ 550... I guess there can be lemons with anything you buy...I would shop around and look at a few more if I were you....

Z

My CZ550FS in 9.3 X 62 shoots groups under an inch at 100 yds. with most any ammo I drop in it. The action was actually a little stiff when I got it, but after cycling it a couple of hundred times with a little compound it's now smooth as glass, no feeding problems, nice wood, very good trigger. Couldn't ask for more.

Larry Sellers
SCi Life Member

The CZ is the simplest, inexpensive, practical platform for a rifle in cartridge based on a 416Rigby case.

Well it is just a good ol steel classic rifle at a fair price. not a cobbed up ruger--or plastic remington, or an AR...ect...The guns out now are some of the ugliest in history.

Ruger "American" Savage axis,Remington 770 built to a price point nothing else. No quality

If we made a quality product that would compete with CZ I would by it (Left handed too).

quote:

Originally posted by 505ED:
Well it is just a good ol steel classic rifle at a fair price.

That is it. They are built the way rifles used to be built, with solid, reliable engineering. When you are in the field with a "pretty" rifle and it starts having feeding problems, the pretty factor tends to loose its alure. But that is not to say that there are no pretty rifles that function. It is really a matter of getting what you pay for and deciding where you want that investment to focus the most on. With that said, Ive never had one, but I like how innovative Ruger has been in the past with investment casting and whatnot to keep prices affordable and wouldnt mind trying one of their CRF rifles. Never had either one but the general consensus seems to be that the CZ is typicaly a more solid platform.

I have two a 7x64 and 6.5 swede. They are built like tanks. They fit like a glove. The 7x64 is the most accurate rifle I own. I havent shot the 6.5 yet.

Oh and the trigger..I like their triggers.

The Cabela's here in Lacey has had a CZ550 9.3x62 sitting in the rack for the last 6 mos. Seen it everytime I go.

Based on the accuracy and reliability of my 452 in 17 hmr I wouldn't hesitate to buy another CZ. I don't care for the stock or safety design of th CZ compared to some other rifles but it is more reliable than some Remington 700's that have a big following.

My 17 has so far out performed much nicer looking Ruger and a less nice Marlin, I don't think that is unusual. Anyone who has used the CZ 17 has liked it even if like me they don't care for the safety like me.

I think it's that one can get calibers that are not offered by other gun makers. Also they are so darn accurate. oh they don't cost an arm and a leg. I own a 550 in 9.3x62 my first cz I am looking for an accurate 22-250 I think it will be a cz also.

The first one had some machine burrs. After a little stoning it was a charm. CZ 527 American in .222.
My second I shot new out of the box a little over a week ago; CZ 527 varmint laminated stock .223. Five shoot MOA. Action smooth and tight. The triggers on these just suit me to a TEE; many times to my liking over the accutrigger.
Wed. I'll give the new CZ it's second work out along with some reduced loads in the 6.5 R-Bar. roger

I'm not totally objective since I know some of the people at CZ, but there are few CRF options, CZ, Mod. 70, and Ruger. CZ's tend to be on the heavy side but I have always had pinpoint accuracy with 550's and never any feeding issues. They're good guns.

BTW, I'd never take a push feed against dangerous game. (not meant to tick off any Rem 700 admirers).

If you have been using a fat bolt rifle with small locking lugs you are used to a smoother tighter fit.
The racking the bolt in store test is not the real function of a bolt gun. The function is how well it works when loaded. Most of that is when you shove the bolt home on a loaded round.
If you like them slick in a store try a Mannlicher-Schoenauer, Krag or Lee-Enfield.

sns2,

I know what you mean about rough out of the box. My first CZ was in .375 H&H. I was shocked when I first worked the bolt despite being prepared for some roughness. I sat down, watched a couple of periods of hockey and cycled the action. No concerns at all by the third period. After 9 years, I can't see myself ever selling the rifle.

Dean

If I wanted a trim 30-06, the CZ is probably not where I would look (probably go for a M70 or M98), but for a Safari Rifle, they make a solid action. You get a CRF, double square bridge, full length magnum action able to hand a 416 Rigby straight from the factory for a lot less than a custom.

In the early 80s when they were first imported into the USA, they were very inexpensive. Although they were/are a little rough, they offered Mauser features, including double square bridge full length magnums. I bought several ZKKs in various calibers, including the big 602s, for around $265.

They're a good product at a good price, something that can't be said about a $1199.00 Ruger. A quick glance at MSRP reveals that the superior CZ sells for $10.00 less. I realize that won't even buy a box of cartridges, but Ruger squirts them out as fast as their molds will cool and charges premium prices for something that isn't finished nearly as well. For every CZ I've filed on and polished, I've done a dozen Rugers...

I have a couple of CZ's. Best rifle for the money IMO. Especially the larger calibers. Yes, they are initially rough and clunky. But they smooth out with time. I don't know of another factory rifle that offers CRF and an honest 4 down with the 416 Rigby! They are built like a tank and the sloppiness of the bolt is a feature of the Mauser action as it allows proper function even if some grit gets in it.

With a bit of work, they can be turned into exceptional rifles. On my 416, I had the barrel shortened, a synthetic stock installed, smoothed, a model 70 type safety installed, and gun coated. This for about $2,000 all in. It would be hard to find another rifle with the features this gun has for anywhere near that price, starting with the most important features which are CRF and 4+1 capacity.

I agree with the above comment that if you aren't into hunting DG, the various Remchesterby rifles are probably all you need. But for a serious dangerous game bolt rifle, it's hard to go wrong with a CZ. Just take a look around at the number of PHs in Africa that use them for their primary back up rifle!

I have a 527, very accurate, nice wood, so-so checkering, love the set trigger, and it's dang cool looking.

I'd do a 550 in a heartbeat then ship it to AHR for a safety and bolt handle.

http://www.hunting-rifles.com/CZ/CZowners.htm

I'd keep my eyes open for an early CZ at the gunshows, too.

Form, and function.
For my frame, they are a perfect fit.
First CZ, a mannlicher 9,3x62, wonderful balance, really nice wood,lotta fun to shoot. Known as Thumper. If I had a dog, I might not be as emotionally attached to that rifle as I am. But I don,t have a dog...

My CZ 527 varmint in .223 does seem to have a rather short throat for my liking. I can live with it, however. roger

My CZ 550 American Kevlar 9.3x62 is my first and only CZ. In some ways, it is really hard to compare it to other bolt action rifles. It is hard to describe, but the Mauser-style action, though not as smooth as some of my rifles, has a positive lockup feel especially when ejecting spent casings. Also, it may be a bit barrel-heavy but, that isn't a bad thing for larger calibers. Simply, it is built like a tank. Oh, I really like the dingle set trigger. I would buy another without a second thought.

I have a 7x57 custom on a 1909 action that I would not call tight enough to be even termed sloppy. I have a ZKK602 in 375H&H (was Jon Speed's last rifle in Africa)and it is smooth as silk and quite tight. I have a CZ550 in 416Rigby Custom (by myself) that is more than just acceptable and only thing done to the action is the follower was modified to feed last round smoother(ten minutes grinding with a flex shaft grinder). Safeties are original and I have used both on dangerous game successfully in Africa. They don't bother me a bit. I do like the original trigger on the ZKK602 better than the set on the CZ550. All said I actually prefer the Model 70 to both the 98 and the CZ/Brno. That's what it's all about -- personal choice.

Just buy a Winchester-----

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
Just buy a Winchester-----

Cross,

No arguing the fact that the M-70 is a more refined action and is much smoother. And to be sure, I'm a M-70 fan. However, there are benefits to the CZ that the M-70 can't match, especially in the larger calibers where the CZ really shines ... a true Dangerous Game Safari rifle.

The M-70 can hold the 416 Rem, but not the Rigby. Why is that important? Well if one chooses, the Rigby can be loaded much hotter than the standard ballistics where the Rem. offers no option in kind. Better to have it and not need it than the other way round! Furthermore, I don't know of another factory rifle on the market that will take 4+1 in the Rigby, the M-70 being 3+1 in the 416 Rem.

The M-70 is a 3+1 in 375 also while the CZ is 5+1 in 375. I have one of each make in 375. Which do I like better? Well, it depends on where I intend to hunt with them. The M-70 is stainless and synthetic so I'd prefer it in Alaska or similar environments. The CZ is original with Walnut stock so I'd prefer it in Africa, especially with the extra shot capacity. Truth be told, I'd rather have my 416 Rigby CZ for both places as it has features of both such as the synthetic stock, gunkoted metal to prevent rust, M-70 safety installed, and betters the M-70 with 4+1 capacity. As set up, it far surpasses a M-70 IMO.

To take it a step further, depending on how large a caliber one wants to shoot, the M-70 can't begin to house the true big bore rounds such as the 505 Gibbs, 500 Jeffery, 600 OK, and the like. So again, IMO, and we all know that and a $10 bill will probably buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks, the CZ is more of a true Safari rifle for DG, especially with a few easy modifications. No flies on the M-70 for sure, and the things Micheal458 has done with his B&M line is pretty impressive, but I think the CZ is more versatile, especially in the larger weapons. Rifles such as 300WM, 270Win, etc., maybe not so much.

In 1997 I bought a ZKK 602 (magnum) Brno in 458 Win Mag for a very low amount of money..
Really nice wood. I made the "hog-back" into a small Monte-Carlo and made a Jeffery-style front end. Put in 2 crossbolt, bedded it and put on a Pachmayr Decellerator.
My gunsmith took it up to 460 Guns&Ammo. I ordered a whole pack of Remington 405grainers, loaded them to 2200fps and had as much fun anyone could have for 1200 USD...

The action was rough, but I soaked it in gun oil and rubbing compound and after some 1000 repetitions it was slick as a Rigby!

M

The 527 .223 varmint today digested everything put into it and put out MOA or better.
The tops was Berger 52 and 55 grain fb-hps. Next was the Nosler 52 grain competitions, but surprisingly the 34 gr. hp. Varmint Nite Mares performed almost as well. The powders used were WCC844 and 2230-C. The only change I would make on this rifle would be to reduce the thickness of the pistol grip. Personally I find these CZ 527s to be one great value. roger

the 9.3x62 i am looking at right now shuts up like a bank vault. the 375 i had did the same. the same with the one my father had and the BRNO 602 before that.

they feed and eject every time. they're nearly as stout as the good women of Maine and they can be made up into very classy rifles.

what was the question again??

Speaking as someone who almost exclusively uses CZ or the older BRNO - they were cheap and good.

From my .22 Model 1 - which can still shoot groups the size of a shirt button at 25 yards (it was proofed in 1947) upward they have delivered great service and are solid.

So I have the .22, a CZ 527 full stock in .223, a custom 7x57 on a ZKK601 action, a ZKK600 30-06, a ZKK602 custom 375 H&H (this one is a bitch - with a load it likes it has shot consistent 14mm centre-to-centre groups at 100m - change the load and it's 50mm (2") if you're lucky), then the ZKK602 458, which is lovely to shoot.

Then there's the ZKK601 custom in 260 Rem, which I still haven't fired (Aussie licencing).

There is a reason I have settled on ZKK actions and that is because it's what I started with and I like them AND the safety works / worked the opposite way to most of the other factory makes.

Seemed to me that there was no reason that one was instinctively better than another, just that you always use what you're used to.

Oh yes, quality can be a bit of a crapshoot - for instance my .223 FS has really nice walnut on it with sharp cut chequering and the bolt is as slick as eel snot - at the time I was buying, another shop also had an "identical" CZ FS .223 - it had stained beech stock with impressed chequering, and a the bolt was rough.

Was mine the model that the CZ gun-drummer carried to the shops and showed the buyer, whereas the other one was the one that actually got delivered? I don't know.

I do know I like my CZ's (and BRNOs).

There are others as good.

I have a 452 in .17 hmr and a .375 h&h. Both are smooth as glass, laser beam accurate, reliable and came from the factory with single set triggers. I visited the factory last year and was very impressed with the dedication to quality and the old world gun making. All their barrels are hammer forged, the only castings were to bolt handles and pistol frames. I don't think you can touch a CRF rifle of comparable features and quality for anywhere close to the CZ price. I will take them over a domestic factory gun any day.

A buddy gave me on permanent loan (if I wished) a ZKK 6.5x55 that was new, unfired except maybe at the factory.

I had to clean the grease out of the barrel and action before using it.

It had a single set trigger, neat trigger with a mini-trigger set in it. You pushed the trigger forward then when you pulled the little mini trigger in the trigger it was a hair trigger. If you didn't set it, you just took up the slack on the little trigger and pulled as normal.

The action was great, no complaints there. I've only ever once shot a brand new rifle before.

I bought Leupold mounts for it, scoped it and shot it at the range, it shot very well, then I gave it back to him.

Why?

It was too heavy and I would never have taken it hunting.

Besides, it was too long for me and I didn't want to take off the factory recoil pad and screw up its resale value for my buddy.