Anybody shot the 9.3 in both the CZ American and fullstock guns? Wondering which seems to handle recoil better? Always been a little skeptical of the humback Europeon design. If any one has shot these two styles in any caliber, comparisons would be appreciated.

joe25/06

Have you tryed recoil calcuator at Hunt. America. com, you mite find what you are looking for there. You will need to know bullet weight and velocity, and the gun weight. try it and see what happens.

6.5 SWEDE

joe...i have the old "lux" model. i don't see that model listed on cz's website anymore but it's the european style stock. i shoot a 270 grn speer at about 2450 and the recoil, while respectable, is really not a problem. i think you will like a 9.3x62 so just get the one you like best and don't worry about the recoil. somewhere on my "want" list is a 9.3x62 in the full stock. it just looks cool

good luck with your choice...bud

I have only shot a CZ 9,3x62 American and a VZ.24 built with an "american-like" stock.

Unless you are really recoil sensitive, I don't think there's much to worry about. The 9,3x62 pushing a 286 at 2375-2425 fps simply doesn't kick very hard. I would describe it as not much worse than a 30-06 and way less than a .338 Win Mag.

I like the caliber so well, that I am going to build another on a VZ.24 action on a synthetic stock for use in lousy weather. I hate to wag a pretty rifle into the rain and snow on the mountain when I may fall on it and ding the pretty wood.

I'd say it recoils about like a lighter weight .30-06, nothing like a .300 WM or .338 WM. The CZ's are fairly heavy, I also have not shot a full stocked one, but doubt I could tell the difference.

I have an older Lux. I had an opportunity to shoot it next to a Lux fullstock. With Barnes 286 X bullets at about 2400 fps, both are very easy to shoot, just a hard shove. Not a fast jab like my 375 H&H. 9.3"s are typically lighter, trimmer rifles than an average 375 H&H, easier to carry on long treks. You will really enjoy the 9.3x62.

I own a FS, mannlicher stocked carbine. Eight and one half pounds with 3x9 B&L variable...so maybe 7+ pounds without it. It's a handy little rig, and recoil is very moderate. I wish I'd been able to buy one of these and components thirty years ago. I just called Graf this afternoon and ordered 200 more PRVI cases, and 500 of their 286gr bullets. 20-cents apiece for jacketed bullets is almost cheaper than casting some of my own, cheap enough to allow lots of practice, as is the loaded stuff, at $12.99 per box. They are downloaded, 2198fps...makes range trips even better. The more I shoot mine, the more I think it will go to Africa this summer as the backup to the 550 Gibbs Magnum on Buffalo and for Zebra and Kudu.

Good guns, good rum, and good ceegars! What a life!

You are going to love the 9,3x62.

Rich
NRA LIfe Member
DRSS

Took a few pictures of my new CZ550FS, but don't know how to post them here. Also ran the "recoil calculator" based on the PRVI loads and it came up at 30# of recoil for my rifle. This compares with my Kimber .300 WSM, 180 gr. @ 3300fps that produces 38#. The snow is falling here, so it will be at least next week before I get to shoot this new gem.

Larry Sellers

Thanks for the replys. I have owned a couple of .35 Whelans, so have an idea of what the recoil level is. I was wondering if one stock had less "perceived" recoil than the other. My dad used to build stocks, so I know that a proper fitted, well designed stock feels like it recoils less than the same gun with a poorly designed stock. The Remington BDL design would beat me up, while a Ruger or Winchester in the same caliber felt like it recoiled less. Hence my question on the two stock designs.

I have a lux 9.3 cz and I think it recoil is ver managable. I think which ever gun is the lighter one will have the most recoil, I am tipping it will be the FS ??