Some excerpts from the CZ-USA 2020 catalog may be found here:

http://forums.accuratereloadin...311025752#9311025752

So glad I bought my CZ 550 American 9.3x62 w/Kevlar stock a few years ago before they decided to axe this particular version. Absolutely my most accurate rifle. Sad that it is no longer available.

Its a shame that linked thread went to shit with political banter.

I wonder how long it will be until the 527 follows suite with the 550. Might be the excuse I need to pick one up.

Wasn't there another thread somewhere with counts of which barreled actions/rifles CZ had in stock vs which went to Triple River for customs? Sounded like a pretty short list for each caliber if I recall correctly.

So is the 550 dead ?

i know the left handed 550 in 375 is dead.

Glad I got one in 375 custom made by Wayne and another in 458 Lott half custom-made.

The 527 is a great little gun. Nave a left handed 223.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Brandon.Gleason:
Its a shame that linked thread went to shit with political banter.

I wonder how long it will be until the 527 follows suite with the 550. Might be the excuse I need to pick one up.

Wasn't there another thread somewhere with counts of which barreled actions/rifles CZ had in stock vs which went to Triple River for customs? Sounded like a pretty short list for each caliber if I recall correctly.

Thanks for that. It will be copied to THAT OTHER THREAD, hopefully to improve its tooth to tattoo ratio.
And for those without enough attention span to scroll upward from where that link takes them,
here it is again:







The CZ 557 pushfeed is available in both short and "long" actions (.30-06-length).
The CRF CZ 527 is the Micro-Mauser, too short for the .458 WIN.




Rip ...

Here's the aforementioned link with the numbers in circulation vs the number of actions being withheld for customs at Triple River.

https://www.africahunting.com/...0-gone-or-not.55123/

Start buying them up! Or switch to Model 70s with aftermarket drop box.

I have several rifles built around the CZ 550 Magnum action, and rank it as the best action ever available, on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Maybe, when all is said and done, simply the best action there ever was, dollars be damned. Great action.

Nice to see CZ will continue to make them.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
I have several rifles built around the CZ 550 Magnum action, and rank it as the best action ever available, on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Maybe, when all is said and done, simply the best action there ever was, dollars be damned. Great action.

Nice to see CZ will continue to make them.

I strongly share your sentiments, Michael. Who's built your rifles?

Brandon, most were built by AHR in Montana. One was done by the duo of metalsmith Mike McCabe and stockmaker Chic Worthing.

All that advertising for 2020 to sell off the last few hundred actions made on worn out machinery ?
The dwindling market for big bores makes the investment in new machinery unfeasible ?
Life's a beach, and then you die.

RIP ...

The CZ and previously the BRNO would be among the most common 375s and 458s in Australia. Although price has been the factor as a lot cheaper than M70s.

No more CZ550 on czech website:
https://www.czub.cz/en/

If all they are doing is sweeping out the dust bin, then that is indeed bad news for big bore riflemen.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
The CZ and previously the BRNO would be among the most common 375s and 458s in Australia. Although price has been the factor as a lot cheaper than M70s.

I would say the same for Argentina as in a modern action gun that won’t blow the bank.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
I have several rifles built around the CZ 550 Magnum action, and rank it as the best action ever available, on a dollar-for-dollar basis. Maybe, when all is said and done, simply the best action there ever was, dollars be damned. Great action.

Nice to see CZ will continue to make them.

For the bigger calibers (450 Rigby 505 Gibbs, 500 Jeffery) it's an amazing action. Built like a bank vault. Much more solid than the M70 (heresy I know).

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:

For the bigger calibers (450 Rigby 505 Gibbs, 500 Jeffery) it's an amazing action. Built like a bank vault. Much more solid than the M70 (heresy I know).

Even in comparison to the Mauser M98, I think the CZ 550 wins. Now that is truly heresy. But if features are compared side-by-side, I think most would agree.

The CZ 550 action has the following key features in common with the Mauser, and all of these are, IMHO, excellent features:

1. Mauser type bolt, including two, opposed front locking lugs and non-rotating claw extractor, with an undercut extractor groove to aid extraction.
2. C-ring internal collar in the front receiver ring.
3. A third locking lug on the bottom of the bolt.
4. Action cocks on opening.

But the action is different from the Mauser in a number of respects, and IMHO these differences make it a mostly better design.

PRO - Extractor claw is beveled and relieved to snap over the cartridge rim when loading a single round fed directly into the chamber ahead of the bolt. Not a great idea to do this with any frequency, but it’s great to be able to do it when necessary! Note that it’s an easy fix to make a Mauser extractor do this.

CON - Bolt shroud is not flanged for gas deflection. Why every bolt shroud on every Mauser-derived bolt action rifle is not flanged I will never understand. PITA to fix. Some say the fix is not needed, and I see their point. I have several Mauser-derived bolt action rifles with non-flanged bolt shrouds and don’t lose any sleep over it.

CON - Safety is mounted on the side of the action, rather than on the bolt shroud. This, I admit, is the merest of personal preferences, but it’s my preference! Plus, some CZ safeties are two position, and I prefer three position safeties. The Mauser flag safety is a bigger CON though, since it prevents proper low scope mounting. Winchester got it right on the Model 70 with the three position wing safety. Easy fix on both the CZ and the Mauser.

CON - Bolt has one, small gas relief port, on the bottom, rather than the two, larger ports of the Mauser. Again, not a huge deal, but why not go with two large ports, which is clearly a better and safer design? Another port could be added, but only a nit-picker would venture into such PITA territory.

CON - Action has a Winchester Model 70 type, spring-loaded ejector blade, located in the bottom of the action on the inside. Probably just slightly less reliable than the outside, side-mounted Mauser ejector/bolt stop lever. But again, as long as it’s kept clean and lightly lubricated, not a big deal. OTOH, there is a PRO associated with the CZ ejector, in that it enables placement of the slot for the ejector on the bolt body, rather than through the left locking lug. This makes the lug somewhat stronger. But again, not a huge deal.

PRO – Action has a Model 70 type, small, rear-levered bolt stop that is pushed to operate. Much less obtrusive and easier to operate than the pull operated Mauser, and just as effective as compared with the Mauser.

PRO - One piece bottom metal, with a hinged floor plate, with Model 70 type button latch. The only thing comparably convenient on the Mauser is the 1909 Argentine bottom metal.

CON - Action comes equipped with a CZ-designed (rather over-complicated), single stage (and singe set/who needs it?) trigger. But a big PRO of this feature is that at least it’s single stage, since I don’t care for a two stage, Mauser military style trigger on a hunting rifle. But again, not a big deal, and an easy fix, for both the CZ and the Mauser.

PRO - No thumb slot on the left side of the action. Makes for a more rigid action. But once again, not a huge deal.

PRO - Action has integral scope “bases” in the form of milled grooves on the square topped bridge and receiver ring. This is a fantastic and underrated arrangement. Coupled with the milled notch in the bridge, this set up makes for trouble free and rock solid scope mounting. This system can, of course, be duplicated on the Mauser action, but only with a lot of work and expense.

If they do stop making the CZs, I for one will miss them

Don't forget the flimsy sheet metal box on the CZ 550 Magnum, just like on the Winchester M70.
They both need re-inforcement in the front to prevent dents from battering in recoil,
unlike the sturdy Mauser boxes of thicker steel built integral to the bottom metal.

True. The CZ is a CON in that regard.

But the Mauser is a CON too, when you factor in not just the battering of the forward wall of the magazine box itself, but also the battering and deformation of soft point bullets in the magazine when a heavy recoiling rifle is fired.

IMHO, both the CZ and the Mauser are inferior to the Blaser in terms of magazine box construction.

The Blaser has a removable magazine, but it's the magazine well that is inlet into the rifle stock that I'm talking about.

The Blaser R93 has a thick, rubber forward wall in the magazine well. It's not even part of the magazine, but rather is built into the well in which it fits. (The magazine in the R8 includes the rubber front wall.) The R93 magazine is open in front, so the loaded cartridges are free to move in recoil against the rubber "wall." (Same with the R8, except the front wall is incorporated into the removable magazine.)

This rubber wall prevents any battering or deformation of soft point bullet noses (or the magazine itself) in heavy recoiling calibers.

I have often thought it would not be too difficult to adapt a standard CZ/Mauser/Winchester magazine well (or box) to incorporate such a protective rubber front wall.

But I have never seen one or tried to have one made.

First edition CZ-USA 550 Magnum in .505 Gibbs had a rubber pad at the inside front of the magazine box.
That box had been extended to longer than normal by cutting and welding on an extension of sheet metal.
Later .505 Gibbs rifle from CZ USA had that rubber plate inside the front of the box replaced by a steel plate.

I did not know that. Great idea, though. I wonder why they changed back? Bean counters would be my guess, although I would certainly pay extra for such a feature.

Con:bolt not flanged for gas deflection .I had a New BRNO 602 years ago in 458 Win ,with reduced loads and lead proj ,gas would go past the case back into the action, and into my face/eyes.
Not impressed .Had a Weatherby mkv 300 win ,a factory round cracked in the belt, and sent gas into the action ,none of it got into my face .Cant comprehend why actions in this day and age are not as safe as they should be .

Maybe they take it for granted that everyone wears shooting glasses