HAVE DEcided to get the Rigby caliber.
NOW of choice of two, based purely on economics and best bang for the bucks, Get the Ruger M77 or get the CZ?
I know there are "better" out there but I have to be somewhat economically prudent on this issue.
I have shot both sparingly in other calibers, have owned neither.

I know the CZ has some things that are recommended to be done to it and they shouldn't cost more the the Ruger would cost when all totalled up, I am guessing.
Would the "average" Ruger need $$$tweaking out of the box also?
Based on your folks experience which would you recommend?
thanks

SCott,
you can believe whatever you wish.... 14.25 is from CZ, when richard was researching a ruger vs cz, and that's the info from a call to cz

jeffe

I think you should buy My Ruger RSM 416 Rigby, it comes with 17rds of Federal Ammo...... ......DJ

-I like my RSM 458 Lott a little better.....

LAWCOP,

I would get the CZ. The Ruger's aren't that great, their bedding SUCKS (good luck finding a gunsmith that knows the correct way to bed their UNIQUE system).

Both rifles need bedded, the Ruger is just more difficult that is all.

Jeffeosso, I believe the bavarian stocks are ~ 14" LOP, but the American stocks I have personally measured (two 458 Lotts and a 416 Rigby) measure ~ 13.75" and felt that way too.

ASS_CLOWN

Lawcop,

Congratulations! The Rigby is an incredible cartridge. In answer to your question, the Ruger (out of the box)is much better than the CZ. However, you can customize the CZ into an excellent rifle for probably the same amount of money and get it exactly how you want it to be! There have been several prior posts showing some awesome customizing by Roger Ferrell on Judge G's and Mbogo375's guns (both CZs).
Check them out to see how a good smith can turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. If I had a choice between a Ferrell CZ or a AHR CZ vs. a Ruger there would be no contest. CZ all the way!!! I bought a Dakota 416 Rigby due to having gotten a deal to good to pass up. Hugh

THE questions...

what's your LOP?

the cz is 14.25

jeffe

I've owned a Ruger 77, Brevex Mauser and two CZ550s in 416 Rigby. For an out-of-the-box gun with perhaps a little customization (M70 safety, minor stockwork) I prefer the CZ.

I own both a Ruger and a CZ 550. The Ruger is a more massive feeling gun than the CZ. They seem to have huge barrels. I personally do not like the feel of the Ruger stocks on any of their bolt guns. I don't like the flat treatment in the grip area. I also don't like the safeties at all. The CZ has the ugliest stock around (hogback) and I don't like the skinny trigger but either of my rifles shoot well enough to take to Africa and use on DG with no hesitation at all. It just boils down to personal appeal. I lean to the CZ.

I had a Ruger #1 in .416 Rigby that I really enjoyed shooting. It would pack a whallop - for sure, but it was a very accurate and reliable gun.

Do you just want a bolt action or would you consider the single-shot #1. The Model 1 is only around $80 more, and in my opinion is a very accurate and reliable gun, with rock-solid performance.

I would recommend a trigger job for both the Model 1 and the M77 just because I like a 3 lb trigger. I have no knowledge of the CZ.

LawDog,

Congrats on zeroing in on getting a 416 Rigby. If you were like me, then I'm sure you suffered through quite a decision process as there are a couple of close competitors (never liked the Weatherby and shied away from the RemMag). When you hold five rounds of Rigby in you hand you know you've got ahold of something! If you reload, then use the Barnes book as they are not afraid to print what it takes to get the best of what the old boy has to offer!

In deciding between Ruger and CZ, I went to Cabelas and they laid out a CZ and a Ruger, both in 416 Rigby. I closed my eyes and had a friend hand me each rifle. Still with eyes closed I hoisted and mounted each one sensing which fit me the best and which felt the best. I only opened my eyes briefly once I was looking right down the barrel. I made it a point NOT to try to figure out which one I was holding, only trying to figure which I liked. This went back and forth several times until I declared, "this is the one!" When I looked down, to my surprise it was the CZ! For my physique the CZ (yes, hogback stock and all!) fit the best BY FAR, that is the one I bought and it has not been a disappointment.

One side note if you intend to use it for dangerous game.... the CZ can hold 4 in the magazine (some can, some can't, some require some work to get #4), the Ruger holds 2 cartridges down. Makes for a "sleek" rifle; however, when hunting, things don't always go just to plan, I personally like the extra ammo.

Good Luck,
EKM

Scotty,
actually , you said "~14".. and then "says 13.7"... so YOUR estimate is off .3, if you read the sight... but I can't "be off" .250?


then again, I have also put in a 3/8" spacer on richard's cz to get a 14 5/8 LOP...

there ya go... i reckon always having the internet to search VS having one's hands on a run is better.


My POINT is that the CZ has ~.75 longer LOP than the ruger... and, for me, the ruger is USELESS as a full rifle, in that the stock will have to be replaced, and the CZ CAN be forced to worked with a f990 and a .50 spacer.

either one would require me, long term, to restock...


didn't want the fella asking the question to get burned by it... and/or get scope cut

jeffe

George, Mike...

Ouch, I stand corrected. The 2 + 1 was the Weatherby in 416 Wby Mag which I considered for a bit before settling in on the 416 Rigby. A little voice was nagging at me inside when I wrote that, was sure it was the Ruger, I was wrong.

I absolutely HATE being the source of mis-information ---- busted. Next time I'll listen to that "little voice". Thanks for the correction!

EKM

There is a significance price difference between the two. I happen to own a Ruger and you DO NOT need to bed it at all. If anything you can bed the metal plate inside the stock but not the action. I had Mark Penrod slick up and true up the action for very little money. Aesthetically speaking I happen to like the Ruger better, even the new American stocks. I have had a chance to inspect and play with the CZs at my local gun shop here. If you are willing to spend the money, I'm sure you can get it up to standards, but out of the box, it's one heck of a rough rifle, the bolts are sticky and fit and finish are not up to Ruger standards.

Also, I think barrel length is way too long on the CZ. Ruger saw the light and shortened theirs to 23". CZs have an advantage in that they hold one more round. The bolt on the Ruger is better designed I think, especially for scopes. Iron sights are better on the Ruger also. So, pick the one that FITS you better, but if it's the CZ, be prepared to spend some money to get it up to DGR standards. jorge

I've never handled a Ruger .416, but I do own a CZ .416. The only changes I have made is to glass bed it, adjust the trigger to my satisfaction, put a scope on it and shoot it. No complaints from me. I have found the CZ's to be some of the most accurate rifles I've ever fired. Either choice, enjoy.

jeffeosso,

Your BS is staggering! I thought the hogback was a little longer than the American style, obviously from the data on CZ-USA's website I was wrong (the LOP of the hogback is the same as the American style)! I KNOW FROM MEASURING THE AMERICAN STYLE THAT IT IS ~ 13.75"! The CZ-USA site agrees with me well within 0.05" anyway. No CZ was made with a 14.25" LOP I know that for a FACT, so your adding in a 3/8" spacer makes the LOP ~ 14".

I have probably handled and/or shot more CZ magnum rifles that you have!

Tell you what, I will drive down to Cabelas this afternoon and measure the LOP on several CZ550 American style Safari Magnum rifles and any Hogback stocked Safari Magnums they have in Stock. Typically the have several CZ550 Magnums, I'll take pictures of the measurements, too!

If they are 14.25" long then you will be right (and CZ-USA will be wrong as will I), if they aren't 14.25" long you will ONCE AGAIN be proven full of it.

Why don't you just tell the truth jeffeosso, and quite pretending to be something you OBVIOUSLY are not! You state more incorrect BS than anyone on this forum, BARE NONE!

The Rugers have a LOP of 13.5" measured over the ~ 0.5" thing they call a recoil pad. By adding a 1" pad you can get a 14" LOP on a Ruger, this isn't the case with the CZ. My Ruger has a 1" pad and a 0.5" spacer adding up to a LOP of 14.5". The Ruger stock has all the feel of a FENCE POST, it plain sucks! The stock CZ550 American style Magnum stock is a LITTLE better than the Ruger, but not much. The bottom metal to wood fit on the CZ American style stock sucks as the bottom metal is recessed into the stock by ~ 0.125" or more (I'll try and get a measured picture of that too).

My CZ550 has a CUSTOM STOCK (no it isn't a AHR stock either!!) on it and a 1" pad yielding a LOP of ~ 14.625". See the CUSTOM STOCK PART of the previous sentence, it is a CRITICAL portion of the description of the FACTS of the situation.

ASS_CLOWN

.

Gary,
once again, work from which one fits you...

i've had and/or loaded for the rem, taylor, and rigby... since I am cheap, the rem wins... but its just NOT a rigby.

jeffe

ALf,
thanks for reminding

i should never have taken it off ignore


now, all i see is

* You are ignoring this user ***


jeffe

Jeffeosso (hopefully he is ignoring me) and anyone else who is interested in knowing the LOPs,

Here are the pictures of the CZ550 American Magnum, the rifle being measured is chambered in 458 Lott, the one directly behind it is a 416 Rigby and the third one back is a 375 H&H. These rifles are at Cabela's in Dundee, Michigan.



The tape is somewhat difficult to read but it is somewhat short of 13.75", that is the LOP of these stocks! Don't believe me call Cabelas and have them measure one for you!

Here is the picture of the poor bottom metal to wood fitment:



That is the 458 Lott in the foreground and the 416 Rigby in the background. The step appears to be 0.125", the tape is hard to read since the clip covers the majority of the graduations at that length.

Here is a Ruger M77 MkII RSM chambered in 458 Lott. The LOP is dead on at 13.5":



I sincerely hope jeffeosso is ignoring me, as his ignorant rants do tend to bore the crap out of me! They also serve NO useful purpose.

Anyway those are the ACTUAL lengths of pull on the CZ 550 American Safari Magnum and the Ruger M77 MkII RSM.

Alf,

I will try very hard to ignore posts which attack me. Hopefully this policy will reduce/eliminate these useless tangent posts. It definitely takes at least two to "party" so if I chose to ignore them the "party" should be minimized or even eliminated! I apologize to all readers of this thread (and a few others) in that I chose to oblige some individuals and digress into this childish BS!

ASS_CLOWN

.

ELKampMaster,

That was LAWCOP asking not me. I already have a Ruger M77 Magnum in .416 Rigby. Also used this same action for my .450 Rigby. Both hold 3+1. I compared the CZ to the Ruger beofre i bought and the Ruger was the better of the two, hands down. Lawcop, get a Ruger M77 and don't look back. Lawdog

Alf,



Tell me about it! As I recall the Bavarian stocked rifles have substantially better wood to metal fit. I truly wonder why these stocks, the American style, are so horribly fitted to the bottom metal? It is an utter mystery to me.



On the bright side, they left plenty of wood so that you can recontour the entire stock and make it the way you want it, at least somewhat.



ASS_CLOWN

"On the bright side, they left plenty of wood so that you can recontour the entire stock and make it the way you want it"

Good point. That's what I have done with all my ZKKs that have nice figure in the blank. Typically I reshape the stock to English or Continental style, add an ebony tip, steel grip cap, inlay a silver oval, solid recoil pad, glass bed, refinish, then have a pro rechecker in a nice classic pattern with Muellered borders (something I can't do myself, not very well anyway).

CZ550s can be made to look real sharp this way too (see Judge G's rifle).

I had one of each. The Ruger was too muzzle heavy and had a very hard butt pad. It was a well made rifle but just did not point well for me. I now have a CZ with a Brockman laminated stock and Talley rings and it's a keeper! Shot a very nice buff with it in Zimbabwe and all of the PH's who shot it tried to buy it off me. With the laminated stock it is nice shooting rig. The action was a bit sticky when new but has slicked up considerably.

fla3006,

IF CZ brings out a 505 Gibbs (I am a .5" bore freak, I don't know why, I just am), and they stock it like the rifles in my previous post, reshaping the stock to my tastes/desires is PRECISELY what I will do. I will then get it duplicated in a nice turkish blank and be a happy camper!

The trick will be to sneak it by the BOSS!

I believe it is imperative to maintain a positive mental attitude in life.

ASS_CLOWN

I like cz's and hence my .416 Rigby is a cz 550. I have had the stock replaced with a custom composite which in hind site I would not have bothered doing, as I quite like the hogsback stock...it works for me in .458 lott and .375 H&H and my 9.3x62 although recoil is not a problem in .375 or 9.3 really.

At any rate the cz's shoot well and there good value.

Pc How do the stocks handle the recoil of the great number of shots you fire? My brothers 375 is doing okay.
I remember you saying you had identified one as requiring replacement-was that the 416?

Karl.

Karl,

have not fired to many in the last 12 months mate !!

My mates .416 Rigby split after the 8th shot from the front of the mag box straight up the guts of the forend. My stock was alright I just wanted an Alan Nauman Corporal trading stock for my .416. My lott and .375 H&H where both bedded before fireing and the lott I had two extra crossbolts added. I have only fired around 50 shots from my lott. The 9.3 I have not had bedded yet but it came with two cross bolts befre and after the mag box as well as a barrel lug......in a better position than my bigger cz's !!

Any bigger chambering I would suggest getting bedded before fireing.

WHILE ON the topic of CZ stocks, I know there are two different offerings, the original and the "American".

WHo has shouldered them both and what really is the difference in fit and feel? Does it really make any difference in how they shoot or how they handle?
Is there any difference in felt recoil becasue of the difference?
thanks

I have handled both the hogback and the straight. Both worked for me with open sights, maybe the hogback even better. I'm small-faced and I find that even with the straight stock (according to CZ especially designed for scoped used) I need to keep my neck straighter than I'd want to get a good sight picture. I'd like to dive in head first so to speak, but I find that I'm too low to see the rear sight. People with bigger heads, more cheek, thicker necks, etc could have different opinions ;-)

I've just shot the straight stocked for the first time, and I find that I get moderate taps against the face..maybe a result from not a 100% snug fit face-on-stock?

Frans

I have the Ruger and have shot about 300 rounds through it and I did nothing but reworked the trigger myself. I've heard a lot about cracking stocks on the CZ, haven't heard of it on the Ruger, but I'm sure one has sometime. Mine shoots 3/4 in., has better wood than most Dakotas, functions perfect. I also have a CZ550 in 9.3x62, and like it also. It's a great buy for the money.

My CZ 416 with the Hogback stock is great with open sights and just fine with the scope.
I put a McMillan stock on it and now it is great with the scope and ok with open sights.
I'll probably use one stock or the other depending on what I am planning to hunt with it.
I tried the American style stock on a Lott last weekend. Didn't seem as good with the open sights to me as the hogback. Try and handle them both. A lot depends on your face shape.
JCN

LAWCOP,

Word of warning here, stay away from the "Hogback" style stock. I tried one when I was deciding which .416 Rigby to get, CZ or Ruger, and the stock on the CZ split at the grip behind the action. Found out that these stocks have a reputation for doing this. If you are going to get a 550 get the American version. Lawdog

LAWCOP,

I would guess that you would benefit from a 14.5" LOP, so neither rifle will fit you well, although you may not realize it. Once you get "fitted" you will NEVER willingly shoot short factory rifle stocks again.

ASS_CLOWN

I'm 6'1" and 190#, 17" 34".

The hogback fits me well.

No need to buy a new gun. Barely used CZ's in 416 Rigby turn up all the time .

I put quite a few rounds downrange with the hogback stock on mine without trouble, but I am going to add another crossbolt and a generous pile of Devcon or Marine-Tex bedding material before I use the wood stock on it again.

Life is good .

JCN

JCN,

Have you ever been "fitted" for a stock by a competitent stocker? My ideal LOP is 15.125". 13.5" LOP or even 13.75" are too darned short, but then I have been spoiled.

Heck I can shoot a rifle with a 12" LOP as long as I move my thumb so it doesn't go up my nose.

ASS_CLOWN

5'8", and 135 lbs, so I'm in a different category completely. Any longer LOP and I won't be able to reach and the bolt with the rifle shouldered. I actually had the factory stock on another rifle shortened because of this (and the fact that I use this rifle predominantly in the cold seasons, when the coat is thick).

Frans