I Have a CZ 550 in 375 H&H. It weighs just shy of 2000 pounds with scope, rings and ammo. As many here have said a 8 pound Howitzer is ideal for carrying. Anyway does anyone see a problem with chopping the barrel down to 23" and having it fluted? That should knock off at least a pound or so. After that I guess I will have to live with it. If you have experience with such or know something that I should, please chime in.

I don't know that I would want to flute that thin a barrel, but you could cut it to 19 or 20 inches and lose a lot of weight. The best place to lose weight would be in the stock anyway.

You would be surprised at how little weight is lost with a two inch cut off your barrel. Order one of CZ USA's new Bell Carlson Kevlar stocks. Check to see what the weight difference is. That is a big action which means heavy. If you cut your barrel down I would guess your talking a few ounces and probably a bunch of muzzle flash.
Take care
Dave

I will take your advice.
Thank you gentlemen!

Which stock?
You can shorten to 23", move the sight back, hollow under the recoil pad, holow the forearm.. hollow the hollow .. and you won't take off the metric ton that it needs to ..

all that being said, its a GREAT action, but 8# isn't going to happen

I also have a cz550 in 375 and dont see any sane reason for a 25 inch bbl.

I think 22 inch would be better to carry. Seems like 22 inch was the standard for a while. I dont see where a 375 needs more bbl than the 06? With a lighter stock, it might balance better too.

When Remington offered the Kevlar stocks they were a lot lighter than wood and lighter than the later cheapo synthetic stocks. I like 470 stock suggestion and if you can have it done easily, I think you can go shorter on the bbl, without going extreme.

Leupold makes a nice light weight 2-7 compact scope, big glass is heavy too. The scope is at least 1/2 your weight problem, I bet. Wanting a big gun, then needing a scope - it all adds up fast. NECG makes a ghost ring rear peep.

For purely selfish reasons, it will be interesting to see what you end up with.

Unfortunately, my rifle has a premium grade wood stock, so probably just keep it as-is.

I hate to admit this, but the Ruger alaskan is an appealing package. (choice of calibers being my only bitch) Maybe you could handle one or even test fire one and then turn you CZ into something similar. That is a 20inch bbl and light. The the blast and recoil must be significant. Even that is a full 8 pounds with no scope, no ammo. I only handled one, unloaded and unscoped - real sweet. If I had an Alaskan, I would not add a scope. Keep it rugged, and simple.

I never thought for a minute that I would be able to get it down to 8# and despite what everyone says, I'm not sure I would want it that light. Right now w/ Leupold 2X7 Euro 30 scope it weighs in at 11 pounds w/ no ammo. I will put up a thread on the Reloading forum asking what velocities people are getting with a 22" bbl.

I checked Leupold website and they now call it "lightweight". The euro is a 1/4 pound heavier. Thats 2-7x in both case. If you drop to 2.5x you are looking at 6 oz, a full 50% lighter. Big glass adds weight fast!

You might look at your rings. I never thought much about the rings weight. But - I think Warne are aluminum and Leupold are steel. (I think wanre makes a QD for CZ?) Might be another oz on the table.

A large caliber 'SAFARI' type rifle with a fluted barrel to me just doesnt look right! Cut the barrel to 22" and maybe find a lighter stock.

I had mine cut to 23" and am quite pleased with it. The barrel profile seems a little heavy but you could always deal with it.

My CZ Safari Classic in 500 Jeffery started out as 375 H&H. With an additional mercury recoil reducer mine weighed 10.25 lbs, so yours should weigh around 9.5 lbs without scope unless they're making them heavier these days. A leupold 1.5 - 5x scope and Talley QR rings would add another pound making it 10.5 lbs. You could shorten the barrel to 22" and replace the stock with a synthetic, or just sell it and buy a Ruger Alaskan in 375 or 416 Ruger and save a lot of money.

Chuck


Chuck

I was just playing with my 458 Lott and took the opportunity to weight my CZ550 in 375 with a 1.5-4 Nikon, 9oz, turkey scope. It is all of 10.5 lbs. I think using the 6 oz 2.5x "lightweight" Leupold with aluminum rings you could get down close to 10lbs.

Its nice to shoot, if thats any consolation

So nice in fact, I just got off the phone with Brownell with an order for a pair of 30mm to 1 inch ring reducers. I can use my spare Tally QD 30mm detachable rings too take the edge of my Lott.

Fluting looks stupid on a Big Bore.If you want less weight spring for a carbon Fibre stock, lightweight scope, rings etc. There is no recoil to a .375 H&H anyway.-Rob

My thought:

You can chop the barrel and replace the stock and maybe still not be where you want to be

or

Sell it, and buy a .375 Ruger and be perfect!...that's what I would do.

Thats

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:
My CZ Safari Classic in 500 Jeffery started out as 375 H&H. With an additional mercury recoil reducer mine weighed 10.25 lbs, so yours should weigh around 9.5 lbs without scope unless they're making them heavier these days. A leupold 1.5 - 5x scope and Talley QR rings would add another pound making it 10.5 lbs. You could shorten the barrel to 22" and replace the stock with a synthetic, or just sell it and buy a Ruger Alaskan in 375 or 416 Ruger and save a lot of money.

Chuck


Chuck

Chuck, My rifles weighs exactly 11 lbs. just like it sits with no ammo, no sling. If I remember correctly it came to me weighing 9lbs.- 14oz.

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Fluting looks stupid on a Big Bore.If you want less weight spring for a carbon Fibre stock, lightweight scope, rings etc. There is no recoil to a .375 H&H anyway.-Rob

Fluting looks stupid but a synthetic stock doesn't???? Sheeeeeeesh!

Hi Rae59, 9 lbs 14 ozs sounds about right I think the weights vary a bit from rifle to rifle. I guess it's your scope that's heavier than mine. I found my 375 to be a bit muzzle heavy (I believe they use the same barrel contour on the 375's that they use for their 416s and 458s) so cutting 3" off might help that, but some folks like it that way.

Best of luck with your gun, I love my CZ,

Chuck

Speaking from the experience of trying to remove extra metal from a Ruger 338wmag. I cut the barrel 2" reduced the taper to minimum went to a cutout blind box and it didn't save me $hit as to weight. Swapped wood for a carbon fiber 1# and I cut around 1.5#. I would leave metal alone and work or swap the stock.

Yup fluting looks STUPID on a Big Bore and a synthetic stock doesn't! a CF stock may not be beautiful, but at least it doesnt look stupid. Those in the know will understand what a real Working rifle needs and more importantly doesn't need. -Rob

I am such a traditionalist, it is not funny. But, a man has to do what a man has to do. I will lighten the rifle...... just as soon as....... I hear of,see,feel one of the new Winchester M-70s.
Maybe selling CZ 550.

What do you want to accomplish, less weight, or improved handling? Each takes a different approach. I don't see the practicality of fluting a sporter-weight barrel.

Better balance is achieved through reducing the weight at the extremes. Said another way, reduce the polar moment of inertia. The weight will be concentrated between the hands. Shortening the barrel and forearm, hollowing the forearm, and reducing butt-stock weight will improve the handling.

I had one of the big CZs in 375, and I really liked it for what it is. I think it's a great piece of equipment. It had a lamimated stock and the checkering provided a good grip, and I liked the magazine capacity. It was used, but you couldn't tell it, because it looked new.

For Africa, and such, it was the sure thing. I didn't like the weight, but I would have kept it anyway just because I liked it, but I didn't need another 375 H&H.

I think this big action serves its best purpose with the really big bores, where weight is an advantage and desirable. I envision a 470 Mbogo or whatever.

So, my choice for myself, and my recommendation is to get a lighter rifle for the 375 H&H. Trying to modify the heavy CZ just costs too much for what you can do with it.

Also, I'm not so sure the Ruger 375 is the answer, although it is about the right weight and length. I have thought about rebarreling a CZ medium action, say a factory 30-06, to 376 Steyr. Get a magnum magazine box from CZ to fit into the medium reciever, and open the bolt face. Unless you absolutely need the power of the 375 H&H and the magazine capacity of the Safari CZ 550, seems like the 376 on the CZ medium action is a good choice to attain the weight and balance of a quick sporter without suffering too much recoil.

Or better yet, just get a factory CZ 550 in 9.3x62, and be happy.

KB

Agree Kabluewy, that's why I had my 375 H&H rebarreled to 500 Jeffery. Also one of the new M70s in 375 H&H might be real nice as well.

Chuck

Rae .. LISTEN .. call Harlan, at the cz custom shop and ask him how much the ENTIRE barrel weighs .. you'll get 10% MAX off that .. the barrel should be about 2-2.25lbs entire.

you CAN NOT lighten 1 lb, and keep the scope, without replacing the stock...

Rob has a 13#, including scope, 585 nyati on that same action, with a plastic stock .. he's only built a dozen or so cz 550 mag rifles

if you want a light 375, either rebarrel a ruger m77mkII, wait for a new winchester, or just save all the trouble and get a 375 ruger african.

and if you are "too nostalgic" for a 375 ruger, then order a winchester.. hacking and fluting a cz aint going to result in a tradional rifle EITHER

btw, i don't suffer from nostalgia or nearly any other sign of being resistant to change

Ray59, I have a Win M70 in 375 and it is lighter, BUT, a wood stock M70, loaded down with a 30mm scope will weight a lot more than a Kevlar stocked CZ550, with a light scope - A LOT HEAVIER. You will be spinning your wheels.

(I never handled one of these CZ kevlar stocks, I am assuming they are similar to the old Remington KS, sounds like they are - jeff knows his crap)

What is the big deal or big expense too swap the stock and admit you made an error on the scope?

Forget the 9.3 blah blah blah, you never go wrong with the 375HH. Anyone who buys a laminated stock and then blames the maker for a heavy gun... wrong guy to ask for advise on lightwt gun... laminate = heavy (always).

Perhaps my CZ may be a good candidate for the new wildcat 404-375 on the Wildcat forum? Reboring the barrel should get me down a few ounces. I need to look in the Midway catalouge, but if my memory serves me correctly, the Euro 30 scope is not more than 17 oz. I don't think that is much more than a fixed or smaller vari-scope.

The Leupold "ultralight" series are a lot lighter. The fixed 2.5x is 6 oz! Click on the "specs" tab.

http://www.leupold.com/hunting...2-5x20mm-ultralight/

Jeff say the kevlar stock will drop, at least, 1 pound. (I think he said that)

That looses 1.5 pounds right there, no expensive gunsmith.

I just happen to think the 22 inch bbl would be better handling, IMHO. And got to drop a few ounces out where it matters most.

You can drop the first 1.5 pounds quick and easy.

The CZ prouducts are really very good.
I have owned 2 550 rfeils, and both shot very well. I have a CZ 75 9mm that is a great weapon.
But I do wish they would come ou with another option in the magnum versions.
I see no use for a 25 inch barrel and or a set trigger on a DG rifle.
They have improved the stock somwhat though.
But no body should be shooting dangerous game (unless its wounded already) at long range.
A simple trigger and a 22 inch barrel. and a single folding rear sight set for 100 yards.
Lighten up the stock by going to an oval cheek piece and shortening the for arm by about 3 inches.
should be a fairly easy fix and take a lb off the weight.
9 lbs finished is a reasonable goal.
The good old 1.5X5 leupold is prety light.
...tj3006

I think you could say the same for Winchester, Ruger AND CZ. All could offer an 8 lb, stainless, synthetic, short bbl - hunting gun in 375,416,458.

I love the big fancy safari grade "BS" stuff, but I never plan to take one of these guns into battle. And, the answer IS NOT inventing new/redundant/stupid 375/416/xyz cartridges. Just offer some options.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Forget the 9.3 blah blah blah, you never go wrong with the 375HH. Anyone who buys a laminated stock and then blames the maker for a heavy gun... wrong guy to ask for advise on lightwt gun... laminate = heavy (always).

I'm wondering just how many ounces heavier the laminate is compared to walnut. I've handled both and couldn't tell the difference just holding the rifle. The CZ safari is a big bulky rifle whether it has a laminate or walnut or Kevlar stock. Of course Kevlar is lighter, or so they say. I've never held one. But I have held and shot the CZ in 9.3x62, and it feels like a lot smaller, handier and lighter rifle.

I've seen several pictures of those pretty walnut stocks busted, but never a picture of a laminate stock busted.

As implied before, if I planned on using the rifle on really dangerous game, I would have little problem with hauling around the CZ safari in 375, but if the game was that dangerous, I would tote a bigger bore. For brown bear, I figure the 9.3x62 will serve as well as the 375.

IMO, the real usefulness of the safari action starts with the 416 Rem.

KB

I got curious so I checked the web catalogs.

The Ruger RSM in 375 is listed at 10 pounds.

The CZ safari in 375 is listed at 9.9 pounds.

The Win Model 70 safari is listed at 9 pounds. (not exactly light, but lighter)

The CZ site, shows same exact weight for every caliber and stock option, so those figures are suspect. Just for yucks, I submitted a question and asked what the Kevlar stocked 375 would really weigh. I think a call to Kansas City would result in an more accurate answer.

RAY59,
Anyway, the gun that might be of interest for you at Winchester is the "extreme weather". This is fluted, stainless, synthetic 7 pound gun available in 338 win mag. And that is with a whopping 26" barrel. SO THEY CAN DO IT, IF THEY WANT TO! This is the gun you want or darn close. If you can live with a 338, or get the custom shop to make you a 375 (if they ever have a custom shop again) or, if nothing else, it shows what can be done.

http://www.winchesterguns.com/...mily=001C&mid=535110

Here is another 7 pound 338 M70 (not fluted):

http://www.winchesterguns.com/...mily=001C&mid=535114

The weight difference for the M70 in 338 between wood and synthetic looks like 12 oz. FWIW. Then, synthetic is not necessarily Kevlar quality or cost. The Remingtom KS (kevlar, custom shop) stock was lighter than their synthetic.

IIRC the CZ's have hammer forged barrels. What happens to all the stresses if you flute them?

IMHO- Fluting is a great way for amateur Gunsmiths with a milling machine and a indexing head to make money off of dummies. Look I've fluted hundreds of barrels for guys who had to have the look and none ever shot any better than a un-fluted barrel and yes, I've done that experiment. Fluting isnt functional its esthetic.You dont save any appreciable weight as you dont normally remove much metal. On a relatively thin barreled rifle like a .375 H&H if the flutes are too deep it can be dangerous. Guess what most GUNSMITHS may not even know exactly how deep their cutting with their 50yr old bridgeports. Personally, I think fluting on a DGR looks STUPID too. -Rob

quote:

I think fluting on a DGR looks STUPID

I agree, but what you and I think is irrelevant, its what Rae wants that counts. It is his gun.

I think muzzle brakes look stupid and rebated rims on ctgs are a bad design.
I dont know you give a damn what I think on that.

quote:

I'm wondering just how many ounces heavier the laminate is compared to walnut. ... I've seen several pictures of those pretty walnut stocks busted, but never a picture of a laminate stock busted.

IMHO, the 375HH, is not that big a gun, that we need to worry about beddin, boltin, or braggin.

The only side by side identical model/caliber I can find on line is the little Ruger compact bolt. The laminate is listed 1/4 pound heavier than walnut. The CZ is a much more massive stock, so I would expect a 1/2 pound. Nice for one of the big 50's perhaps. I can feel the difference. I do understand the laminate is stronger and some look pretty good too.(IMHO) Not the Ruger, but some.

Fourbore,
Thanks for the un-biased info.
I personally don't care what Rob-TGB says/post about fluting.

I was going to post the following on the 375H&H/BOSS thread but the local AR police came after me a couple of days ago for cross-posting -LOL.

I have two identical rifles with identical barrel dimensions, stocks and short actions,etc. One in a 22-250 and the other is a 300 WSM. The only difference is the bore diameters. The 300 WSM is NOTICABLY lighter than the 224 cal. I will have to look at my notes this weekend to accurately tell you how much. A friend of mine, who is a stock maker, commented on how most rifle manufacturers tend to use a "one size fits all philosophy". The only difference being the hole diameter in the barrel. The larger the hole, the less rifle weight, the more the recoil. I have a 338 WM that was so light I could not hold the barrel down while shooting from the bench. I received several bloody gashes while sighting in. I know most of you shoot much larger bores than the 3/8" cal. so recoil in a 375 is not of major concern to you. The point of all of this is when you remove metal - you will lighten things up. Fluting removes metal but still allows a barrel to retain ridgidity. Rob-TGB may be right on the CZ barrel wall thickness not being thick enough to allow proper fluting. I will have to investigate that.

None the less 4-Bore, you are probably right about looking at another make/model. Why diminish the value of the CZ by modifying it when I could get a lighter Win. M-70 in a 375?

knock yourself out, i expect your opinion was made up to begin with

Jeffe- Problem solved. Just added Rae59 to my IGNORE list. No need to waste bandwith on trying to enlighten the un-enlightenable. I love that feature!-Rob

Hey Rae, congrats, we are both on his Rob's crap list. I know what I did wrong, I dared to criticize the 600 Overkill. Being new to the site, I did not know that was a taboo subject.

I dont honestly get how you managed to make his ever growing list. You seemed to be agreeing that he had a point?

Anyway, welcome to the club.

quote:

Originally posted by fourbore:
Hey Rae, congrats, we are both on his Rob's crap list. I know what I did wrong, I dared to criticize the 600 Overkill. Being new to the site, I did not know that was a taboo subject.

I dont honestly get how you managed to make his ever growing list. You seemed to be agreeing that he had a point?

Anyway, welcome to the club.

Thanks 4-bore!
People like Rob-TGB are dingleberries, they always have to be on someone's ASS.
I can't wait to see if he responds.

And who is Jeffeasso's post referring to? He mentioned opinions? Seriously, was it yours or mine or someone elses? He seems to have a attitude too just like Robber.

Its my signature, RAE .. opinions vary and the they certainly do .. and i do have an attitude .. who doesn't?