So, I'm looking at these two rifles. The CZ can be gotten in the hogback European stock, the Ruger has a very nice Circassian walnut stock. The CZ has an adjustable trigger and I don't believe the Ruger does.

I've got a CZ in 9.3x62 with the hogback stock and it shoots quite nice. I've got a Ruger M77 in 7x64 and it is also a nice rifle.

Other than price, is there anything that distinguishes either of these rifles over the other?

I am usually the different one when it comes to this question. The Ruger has more "custom" features: integral quarter rib, barrel band swivel, nice wood in the stock and I have owned both. My Ruger would not feed worth a sh^t so that, to me, made all the other positives totally worthless. After paying a gunsmith a couple of hundred to get it working I sold it and bought a CZ. The CZ feeds everything I put through it without a single problem. After all was said and done, even with the extra money put into the Ruger, I came out ahead.
Most other posters on this forum swear by the Ruger and they all seem to have had great luck with it. Even though mine worked fine after it was fixed, I never had the confidence in the rifle and am still disappointed in the way Ruger wanted to handle it. If you pay the better part of 2K for a gun, it should at the very least feed the cartridges. Their other M77 models, at 1/3 the price, feed and function fine.
I

The CZ's have a very generous magazine capacity, even in the 416 Rigby chambering.

There has been quite a few threads about this in the past. If I remember correctly, the general consensus was:

Ruger: Has the "African" look right out of the box. Check the feeding and replace the hard rubber recoil pad then go hunting.

CZ550: Cheaper option out of the gate. Make sure the stock is bedded and crossbolted (the factory will rectify this if it's not). Check the feeding and have a competent gunsmith install what (if any) aftermarket goodies you desire (barrel band, straighten and fill bolt handle, etc).

They're both great rifles, it kind of depends on what you're hoping to achieve as an end result.

the ruger, in my opinion, is a superior rifle, other than mag cap .. intregal ribs, proper barrel bad sling, 3 position safty,
QD rings, pretty wood and a spring away from a trigger ... the cz trigger is a contraption, not a feature

I my opinion the Ruger RSM's are better built, more "African" and have a better line than the CZ. Granted my CZ in a .375 is large f or the caliber it may be perfect once it becomes a Capstick.I did not care for the hogback and replaced it with an American style stock.
I believe each person has to develope the feel for the right rifle.
Frank

On the other hand, I have taken my CZ 450 Dakota to Africa Cape Buffalo hunting. Never had anything done to it. I shot a couple hundred rounds with cast at 2000fps +/- to get used to it.
The Cape Buffalo did not seem to mind the lack of a quarter-rib or the "contraption" trigger. I put the cross hairs on the crease, set the trigger, and let that gentle one pound (set) trigger squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze off. He did (I think) appreciate the fact that it fed perfectly out of the box.
Think of the extra money you save as a good scope, rings, dies, brass, and bullets as a bonus.

Rich
DRSS

I kept debating the same thing. CZ or Ruger?
Just so you know, here's what the guy at my gun shop told me. He and his buddy went to africa with the 416 rigby. He had a ruger and his buddy had a CZ. It was noted that the ruger kicked slightly less because it is heavier than the CZ. Both functioned and shot great. The difference in the ruger has more attention to detail in it's build.

There is a couple slightly used rugers on gunbroker for about $1400.

I ultimately decided to go with the CZ because I didn't want to wait for a month to get my gun, I didn't want to keep track of the bids on the ruger, and mostly I didn't want torture my self for more days and weeks trying to decide between the two.

Which one fits your body conformation best? There ya go.

I had a box-stock, perfectly-functioning trouble-free and accurate CZ for a couple of years, and then sold it to upgrade to the Ruger. Much nicer style, cool semi-custom features, and more weight so less recoil.

After several years and several hundred rounds, the Ruger stock split behind the tang, six months before my long-dreamt-of buffalo hunt. I was told that the crack was completely repairable, but I lost all faith in the gun and wound up using my .375 as my only gun on the trip.

I wish that I had never laid eyes on that Ruger. I won't go into the tale of the Ruger #1 that was originally supposed to be the second gun on that trip, and developed extractor problems within weeks of the RSM meltdown.

John

I bought the CZ and spent some money to make it like I wanted it and now it is a very functional utilitarian rifle. Not my favorite big bore but completely reliable and I am not concerned about scratching the stock plus that great mag capacity.

Thought I would add some details to this post. I bought MY CZ 550 from Sportsman's warehouse in Lewisville Texas when they were closing the store for about $500.00 and it was a 458 Win mag. I had the following work done; re-chamber to 458 Lott, add a stiffer mag spring, cut barrel to 23", add barrel band sling attachment, add NECG masterpiece barrel band front sight, action trued and lapped, action bedded up to the front recoil lug, weight added to forend, mercury tube added to the but stock, 3 position safety installed, re blued. All this for about $1,500.00 so I have about $2K total in this gun.
I would still like to add a larger bolt handle.

My point may be, (IMHO) you can spend some coin making these guns to your liking. They are a diamond in the rough you can polish up quite nicely.

The quarter rib on the Ruger is a VERY NICE touch!


EZ

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
my CZ 450 Dakota ... Never had anything done to it. ....the fact that it fed perfectly out of the box.Rich
DRSS

Just a quick fact check. Yes, YOU may not have done anything to it, but the fact is cz never made a 450 dakota... it was rechambered, feedwork had to be done, and in fact, work had to be done to it.

price check -- today on gun broker, a cz is 1150 average ... a ruger is 1400 ... $250 bucks? why, that's less than rechambering and feeding, and far less than having a 3 pos safety installed

did you mean 450 rigby? or is it actually 450 dakota?

Thanks for the info guys! I guess it really gets down to the point of which fits me better.

Jeffeosso--I've seen those Rugers for $1400. I was of the impression those were used rifles. On Ruger's site, the MSRP is 2400. Do they really drop $1k off the retail for new rifles?

The Ruger is a probably a better gun than the CZ but the Ruger trigger also stinks. Luckily you can get a replacement from Brownells that makes a huge difference.-Rob

Jeffe,

you ASSUME facts not in evidence.

1. The rifle was originally a 416 Rigby. All that was done was to screw a CZ takeoff 458 Mag barrel on and chamber it. Everything fit and fed perfectly. Four down and one in the chamber; how many does the Ruger hold?

2. I happen to like the factory set trigger, I just had my guy here schmooze it down to a bit over three pounds. That's a pound set, it makes it a target precise mechanism when I choose.

3. I also prefer the two-position safety as do many others.

4. Yes, it is a bit bulkier, and therefore heavier. Since the folks at CZ had the 505 Gibbs in mind, they made the receiver just a bit wider and longer. Ditto for the stock. I do believe they figured out that you could slim the stock down if you choose to. Making it wider is a bit more problematic.

As far as price VS value, that is in the eye of the beholder. Since the Ruger costs a grand more than the CZ new, the fact that they sell for about one-fourth that differential used, I'd say the market does not value them highly.

The choice is all and only about the buyer's preference. I simply think that the thousand dollars more for the Ruger could be better spent buying:
a. Good Leupold scope and rings.
b. Dies, brass, and bullets.

regards,

Rich
CZ fan

GO FOR THE RUGER!!!! I took mine out last night and its consistently shoots 1 MOA at 100yards with everything I load up. I have never had feeding issues. It is truely my go to gun for big bore shooting. I own a 416,458 lott and 500 Jeffery in the RSM and they all are great rifles. I think the CZ's are just too ugly for my tastes. Have never owned one and really don't want one. I purchased my 416 on Gun broker with A Leupold VX III 1.5-5x scope mounted for $1250 about 2 years ago. I'd really have to sell a lot of rifles before I'd let my 416 Rigby RSM go. The only rifle that I like a lot more is my Searcy 450-400 double.

Best of Luck Brad

Rich,
did you add up the costs on the job? the question isn't how well a CZ can be modifed, but comparison between the two stock options.

I didn't assume anything, as CZ never made a 450 dakota, and therefore is a custom job.

I'm going to be selling my Ruger RSM's in 416 and 375, as I had a custom 458 Lott built and these 2 will never leave the safe now.

Anyway, my Ruger 416 Rigby is in 99% condition, it has a timney trigger set at 3 1/2 lbs, I changed the recoil pad, I pillar bedded the 2 action screws and glass bedded the action. I placed an XS ghost ring sight on the action and changed the front sight bead to a NECG patridge square post.

Let me know if you are interested in something lightly used, you will save a lot of money.

I'll e mail you pics if you want.

I have had two RSMs and several CZs. I like the CZ much better because it handles so much better. The RSM, especially in .375 H&H is really barrel heavy. Just my two cents.

This may or may not help. I have had both the Ruger Express and the CZ.

Here is what I changed to get rifles that I would use.

Ruger? New trigger, new bolt, chopped/trimed the stock and added a new recoil pad, bedded the action, added a NECG front bead. Nice scope rings though. Still too heavy in a .416 for my liking and not enough ammo. Holds 3 rounds down...4 shot when required. Still a big and HEAVY riflle with an over sized barrel contour and stock. 1/4 rib is cool though. (but in retrospect I have an intergal 1/4 rib on another rifle I'd like to dump for the weight)

CZ? New safety, new bolt, new trigger, cut and chopped the stock, bedded the action, replaced the island rear sight with a NECG and added a barrel band sling swivel. Scope rings were easy. Most importantly to me holds 4 rounds down...5 shot when required. Over size stock profile with a much nicier and more suitable barrel profile with dbl lugs.

Still have two CZs in similar format. Both out shot the Ruger and are light enough and handy enough to carry in the field by comparison.

Both the CZ and the Ruger are big guns. The CZ, just not too big or too heavy as they come from the factory.

Best buy out of the box imo? CZ by far.

You'll need to glass bed either rifle before you use them though. The Ruger will work at that point. The CZ I would still replace the trigger with a AHR version. (easy to do) Neither rifle comes with a decent trigger imo.
CZ is just more complicated than I prefer. But with a new trigger the CZ will be a better basic rifle for less money than the Ruger and you can still up grade the CZ as your needs/desires/wants change. Up grading the Ruger's capabilities will still saddle you with a very heavy for caliber barreled action.

The Ruger is long gone although I still have a Ruger Express in 30/06 with all the items listed above done to it. Had and built a number of Ruger bolt guns. Only own one now. I am currently thinking about buying another CZ though.....416/450 Dakota conversion or 9.3x64 this time around.

Stocks? Call Ruger and see what they want besides sending the 416 back to the factory for a restock...almost a $1000! The CZ? The American or Hog-back stocks can be had fairly inexpensivly (as low as $50) @ several locations including CZ-USA for $300 retail. American versions are available in basic walnut, fancy wood, laminate and fiberglass/aluminum. All are easy to reshape to your own personal profile with little effort.

AHR has made a good business from modifing the CZ and has now started doing the Rugers.

A quick touch and feel of the 375 and 416 Rugers will tell you why. Backward steps on the rifles even though the ammo was a step forward.

Good luck!

My favorite CZ in a factory, dbl cross bolt, laminate stock that was trimmed down. New bolt, trigger and 3 position safety pictured.

The big, big, big plus feature on BOTH of them is that they both have a decent, neat, well thought out system of mounting and dismounting a 'scope.

In fact the Ruger and the CZ are probably the only two factory volume market rifles that both look good "naked" with no 'scope.

I'd go for whichever has the most "extra" features that you think desirable such as magazine capacity (above all) and then barrel band, factory iron sights, ease of emptying the magazine etc., etc.

quote:

In fact the Ruger and the CZ are probably the only two factory volume market rifles that both look good "naked" with no 'scope.

I would have to agree with you on that. I love to take my CZ to the range, but rarely do I bother to bring the scope. Iron sights are FUN!

I did get a red fiber-optic front sight from CZ so I could see the sight better though. $16 bucks plus the current sight.

Saw this posted here by a Alaskan guide and worth repeating..

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I ended up with a pile of original .416 CZ stocks as all of my guides who carry them in Alaska eventually restocked them with synthetic ones and left the old ones with me. I also put a synthetic one on my rifle but have played with modifying the factory ones and the singularly most comfortable and shootable stock is a wooden one that I cut the forend back to a short Rigby style length, removed the cheek piece, changed the pitch, slimmed the entire stock (especially around the action), elongated and rounded the grip, and slightly flattened the hog back comb till it fit me. I also threw away the forend bedding block, which lightened things up. There is still plenty of bedding surface on the attached barrel lug for a good Devcon bedding job. <br />In addition, since the rifle was such a bargin in the big gun catagory and I intended to use it for serious uses, I cut the barrel to 21 inches, turned the muzzle down enough to slide the original band sight back on (the sights are still dead on), added a Wisner M-70 safety and Talley bold handle and a Lon Paul trigger. I still have less invested than a Ruger plus have a rifle that fits like a glove, handles wonderfully and is reliable and deadly.

I would buy the CZ and send it to AHR for their modification package. Trim the barrel to 22 inches by AHR and you will have a dependable tough rifle. I really value the extra round the CZ holds plus the AHR safety is a big improvement. Strictly out of the box I'm not confident with either one. If it had to be out of the box, I would buy a Model 70 in 458 or 416 Rem.

quote:

Originally posted by LJS:
If it had to be out of the box, I would buy a Model 70 in 458 or 416 Rem.

agreed..

I am surprised a Ruger will hold 3 ea. 416 Rigby cartridges in the magazine. I have never owned one however I suspected more like 2 cartridges in light of the fact this gun will only hold 3 458 Lott or 3 375 H&H cartridges. The Rigby is quite a bit larger in diameter.
This is just speculation on my part??

Just checked their web site; It does hold 3 ea 416 Rigby cartridges. So much for speculation!

EZ

eezridr,

Not only with the M77 MkII RSM hold three Rigbys down, but it will also hold 3 500 A Square magnums down.

Pizzaboy,

I'll add my $0.02. As some have said the Ruger is poorly balanced (barrel heavy) and suffers from a fence post for a stock (the CZ stock is at best only marginally better than the Ruger though). Reboring the extremely heavy (second generation RSM circa '92) from 0.416 to 0.510 dramatically improves the Ruger's balance by the way. The bedding system employed by Ruger is "interesting" and I really don't care for it but if "bedded" correctly it works. With some extra custom work the Ruger bedding system can be eliminated and replaced with a Remington style or even a Kimber style recoil lug and a second barrel lug can easily be dovetailed and soldered into the second 1/4 rib which is diametrically opposed to the one on top of the barrel on which the rear sight is fitted. I have done 500 A2 both ways on the Ruger. I also believe the stocks on the Ruger's to be California english walnut, but who really cares. Both the Ruger and CZ factory stocks are too short for my liking so I tend to replace them with customs. The Ruger trigger is easily fixed by anyone who knows how to stone it properly. I set mine at 3 pounds, and it is better than the AHR CZ trigger (yes I have an AHR CZ trigger). The AHR CZ trigger is a significant improvement over the factory CZ trigger however, and works well, no complaints.

Having said all that I personally prefer the CZ as a platform for a customized rifle though the Ruger has worked too.

For an out of the box rifle in 416 or 458 I would definitely pick a M70 Classic over either the Ruger or the CZ. Unless one just has to have a 416 Rigby, which the M70 is really too small (short) for.

quote:

price check -- today on gun broker, a cz is 1150 average ... a ruger is 1400 ... $250 bucks? why, that's less than rechambering and feeding, and far less than having a 3 pos safety installed

And that's why I don't think I'll buy another CZ today---at least not a new one.

I bought my CZ .375H&H long enough ago that I got it for $770 out the door tax included. I've had work done to it and it still has feeding issues three trips to the gunshop and several hundred dollars later. Put that cost onto the, amazing to me anyway, price that CZ is getting now, and the Ruger makes a lot of sense.

LWD

quote:

it still has feeding issues three trips to the gunshop

Why not box up the barreled action & bottom metal then send it off to the CZ custom shop in KS and have them fix it right?

A Picture worth a thousand words. My RSM's 500 Jeffery, 458 Lott and 416 Rigby.

Brad

Something not mentioned on this thread is the twist in the factory bore.
CZ uses 16.5" in the 416 Rigby,
while the Ruger uses 14", I believe.

The 14" twist is better.
Of course, if the rifle is re-barreled, then you can order a 10" or 12" to better handle the heavy monometal solids.

I very much enjoy the 416 Rigby that I own in CZ550, hogback, scope, and all. However, I limit my bullet selection to 350 grain Barnes TSX and 350 solids because of the slow twist rates.

416 -- cz must have changed something in the last couple years, as they advertise 1:14 for the 416 ... just verified on cz.usa.com

Jeff
did you check 416 Rem or 416 Rigby?

Personal preferences aside, it comes down to two things in the CZ's favor. Magazine capacity, and price differential. Mine all feed flawlessly and all I have done to them is adjust that fine set trigger to three pounds unset. I owned one of the very first RSMs, Ruger sent it home with me from the SHOT Show the year they were introduced.
They just seem a bit clubby to me. Shot great, fed well.

I just prefer the CZ fit, and that is why I own CZ's.

Try them on and buy the one you like. They are both fine rifles.

Rich
DRSS