Please vote for your preference if you were buying a new factory rifle chambered in .416 Rigby.

Happy Holidays.

Question:
If you were buying a new .416 Rigby factory rifle would you purchase the Ruger M77 Magnum or would you purchase the CZ 550?

Choices:
CZ 550
Ruger M77 Magnum

 

I voted CZ

I own one of each and the Ruger is a nice Rifle, but too heavy. As such I voted for the CZ

I also own one of each and prefer the CZ by a longshot. Both have been customized somewhat but by far the CZ is the preferred rifle to me. Both shoot equally well with small groups and comfortable recoil. Have used the CZ on Ele, have never hunted with the Ruger.

ditto jwp475
If the Ruger had an actual recoil lug on the action instead of a solitary recoil plate (that falls off the rifle when you remove the barreled action from the wood) bearing all the recoil stress at one surface in the forearm, I might choose it, but not as it exists in reality. I did use a .416 Rigby RSM (second generation fat barrel) to good effect on cape buffalo, my PH on that trip was packing a CZ .416 Rigby, and I have since purchased two of the CZ .416 Rigby's one for keepin' and one for rebarrelin'.

I prefer CZ.

A vote for the Ruger. The weight is not that big a deal and it really helps with the recoil. Used my RSM in .416 Rigby for three buffalo this year in Tanzania. Used my CZ550 in .416 Rigby at the range and cracked the stock. If you want a rifle that will last, buy a Ruger. If you want a cheap rifle to work on, buy a CZ.

I prefer the CZ even if it requires some work ... like recoil lugs, strengthening the wrist and bedding.

Mine came out beautifully and holds about 3/4 moa. Has taken pigs, Gemsbock, Hartebeast, and Buf.

Like RIP, I have problems with the rifle falling apart when you remove the stock

Don't like Ruger mount system.

Lastly and this is purely personal, I just think rifles with quarter ribs have to be much higher level rifles than the Ruger.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
I just think rifles with quarter ribs have to be much higher level rifles than the Ruger.

So the Ruger is too cheap to have a quarter rib? Sort of an odd way to look at it.

Well, I did say....and this is purely personal

Mike

Mike,
You simply must use more smiley's in order to avoid the personal attacks over attempts at humor.

The F-block falls out of the CZ stock when you remove the barreled action from the wood, but at least this contraption is only part of a secondary recoil lug system on the barrel, and there is indeed a primary recoil lug machined integral to the action on the CZ. Not so the Ruger.

I went for the cz........................if only for the better action lug set up.

Ron,

The system I like best, which I had done to a 416 Wby which was destined for rebarreling, switch barrel ete was:

I had about 1/4" machined off each side of recoil lug. A steel plate with a slot machined so as to go around the action lug inletted into the stock and it was full of holes and epoxied in.

From that point on, just like bedding a 222, no barrel lugs etc.

When we originally put the plate in place we glued it to the action recoil lug for lining up purposes.

Mike

This is just my opinion AND MY PERSONAL experience, with ONE rifle of each manufacture.
My Ruger RSM was a very early one, didn't feed worth a s**t. Ruger refused to work on it unless they replaced the stock since I had put a recoil pad on and a new forend tip. I finally got a gunsmith to work on it, but never did trust it.
My CZ550 fed like you know what through a goose from the time I opened the box, wiped it down and started cycling dummy rounds through it.
Ruger left me with a bad taste. When, and if, I get to go to Africa and hunt something that has the capability to kill me, I want to have 100+% confidence in my rifle. I would have a hard time doing that with a Ruger, but no problem with my CZ. AGAIN, A DISCLAIMER....THIS IS MY EXPERIENCE WITH ONE OF EACH AND I AM NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS TRUE WITH ALL. Sorry for that, but I have seen people get a little testy when you "dis" their favorite rifle.

For the money, I choose the CZ. I bought a new one about 3 weeks ago and it has the latest standards, Two cross bolts and bedding. Also the new trigger is better than the ones in the past.

quote:

Sorry for that, but I have seen people get a little testy when you "dis" their favorite rifle.

Except with Wby and especially the 378 based calibres. In fact one of the reasons we buy them is just to shit people

Mike

I owned the Ruger back when they first came out. Had feeding issues from day one...sold it and got a P17 Remington in 450 Buhmiller. from John Buhmiller Today, I do own two CZ Rigbys, and have not had any feeding issues to date. About four hundred rounds thru the older one, maybe fifty thru junior. I have the confidence in either to take it to Africa buffalo hunting this coming August. The Ruger is a little nicer finished rifle, but the CZ's just work for me. One of these days the least accurate one will go for a caliber change...

Rich
NRA Life Member
DRSS

I voted for the Ruger.......I,ve never had one and think both should be chambered in 416 Rem Mag or 416 Dakota 416 Whby ......If I got the Ruger I would have it reamed to Whby, Since that was my aircat months prior to the 416 revalution...The CZ would get changed into anything other than the Rigby

If I wanted a bolt rifle that HAD to be 100% reliable, have a great trigger, great iron sights, great QD scope mounts and be accurate, in .416 cal, I would get a Blaser R 93 Safari in 416 Rem Mag.

You do not have to worry about IF it will feed, or IF the stock will crack.

I considered both and bought the CZ/416 so I voted for it. I don't want a cast receiver and the CZ was much cheaper, so that money can go toward tuning up the CZ's action. All this said the jury is still out on this particular piece. First time out it shot 5" high at 50 yards. No question as I shot off a bench with the set trigger and eyeballed it thru the bore and then over the sights. The front sight is a #8 and CZ has them up to #14. The CZ parts guy told me the diff between them was a thousandth.(?) I asked again and he said he was sure. So that's all a bit uncertain. I ordered the #14, I'll measure and try it so we'll see. I'm not optimistic, more so because the size of the Safari Mag front sight is a joke. It's tiny, way too small. Told this story to the guy at NECG and he agreed that it didn't sound good and said all he had was a couple Ruger beads that would work but would need to be tweaked. He then said that he had coming a rear peep setup for the CZ. He also lamented about CZ's quality control with huge variations in dovetail cuts given as a common example. I know of another Safari Mag owner that had one that shot very low and instead of dumping it he had it fixed. It was not easy. This guys sells them and hunts them and says that POI has been an issue. Obvious to me that the receivers are off face. They've done some good things with the new setup, relief at the stock around the rear tang and dual crossbolts. But I feel that the stock is too fat. I know the action is designed to hold Rigbys in the mag but it's too fat there in particular. Access to the bolt handle is impeded by the stocks thickness given it's angle so I would change one, the other or both. It may be a forgone conclusion that this gun is going back. But mostly because I want a DR instead.

I think the Ruger is gorgeous and looks like a custom $4000 rifle while the CZ is just ok.

Hello,
Since I now own three of the Rugers and fourth one on the way, yep, voted Ruger, no question!!

I see the voting now is even at 34 each....interesting split.

I wonder how many were "for" votes as opposed to "against" votes.....

Mine was "against" Ruger.

I'm not slamming Ruger, but I prefer CZ. I have two CZs already and can't fault them.

Now when both get lefthanded rifles in that caliber, I'll be able to make a decision. I do have a CZ lefty on order, but been told by our distributor that it will be about six month before it will get in.

I certainly prefer the Ruger Mark II M77 to any other standard length action.

It is just the RSM with no recoil lug on the action that I cannot abide.

Ron,

I am not sure but I think Ruger used the recoil plate and no recoil lug of their early 458 Winchesters.

Mike

quote:

It is just the RSM with no recoil lug on the action that I cannot abide.

RIP,

I know we've been through this before, but why is it that you cannot abide by their recoil plate system?

I know its goofy looking, but it has stood up to the 470 Mbogo for quite some time now.

Cheers,
Canuck

Canuck

Have you got the same system as the Ruger.

The Ruger (unless they have changed) just has a very shallow slot machined into the action flat and the recoil plate is turned up at that end.

I have bedded 3 of them including one I owned and they are a prick of a thing

The real baddies were the early ones, which I had one in 375 and they had the sling swivel as a barrel band in the forend.

Mike

quote:

The real baddies were the early ones, which I had one in 375 and they had the sling swivel as a barrel band in the forend.

That's the same as mine.

I concede it is a bizarre setup, but reality is that the rifle spends 99.9995% of its time "buttoned up" and it has held up to 90lbs of recoil for quite some time now. I take the rifle down once or twice a year max...and its just about as quick to go back together as anything else I own.

Just trying to remember what the big negative about it is? ...and whether its just in theory or in practice....

Cheers
Canuck

Canuck,

As I posted earlier in this thread about modifying a 416 Wby, I think in principle the recoil plate is better than a second lug on the barrel.

But Ruger's system does not make bedding any easier......

Mike

Canuck,
I am simply avoidant of any rifle that has no recoil lug on the action. I was ignorant when I bought that RSM. Live and learn. Your 470 Mbogo has surely been expertly bedded and likely reinforced with hidden cross bolts in the forearm, to back up the recoil plate?

The solitary RSM visible crossbolt serves to prevent the stock from splitting through the magazine well, but it is certainly not backing up any recoil lug on the action.

I voted CZ. I had to make the choice out of these 2 rifles recently for a 458 Lott.

Firstly, the Ruger is a better finished rifle out the box but considerably more expensive than the CZ. The CZ can easily be tricked up with proper bedding, crossbolts and the action smoothed off and you still have some change left over. And its a better feeding action than a Ruger IMO.

The CZ is lighter and handles better than the Ruger which I found to be barrel heavy.

The CZ in 458 Lott takes 5 down the mag ( some guys get 6 I believe) against 3 for the Ruger.

But each to his own - they both make good functioning rifles.

Hello,
Interesting that a Ruger, selling for nearly twice as much is actually more popular, not by much, but still ahead in the poll?? Most of the postings are in favor of the CZ offerings but not the voters it would appear. I believe the discussions about CZ quality control and supposedly necessary "trip to the 'smith..." afer purchasing a new rifle is taking it's toll on the consumers attitude toward purchasing. CZUSA is making a strong effort to become a player in the American firearms market and a review of this poll may well encourage the firm to take steps to upgrade their products to a higher level. I have looked at a fair number of CZ's and as someone else pointed out, they are not quite completely finished/done. When you read of plastic floor plates, plastic followers, somewhat crude stock offerings, feeding problems, etc., it does not take long for the buying public to look elsewhere. The actions/barrels appear to be functional and hope they will improve their line soon. Can't have too many well built rifles available on the market.

I'm left handed, so neither of those choices appeal to me (damn righties!), but I voted for the Ruger anyway. I like the front sight, quarter rib, scope mounts, stock and look of the Ruger more than a stock CZ. Sure, you could send the 550 to the 'smith for some customizing, but then it's not a fair comparison.

Well it seems the votes are in and the Ruger wins. Here's why(in my opinion).
Intregal quarter rib, a minimum of $1500.00 is charged for this by every gun manufacturer.

Banded front sight that is easily changed with a plunger type mechanism, a real nice feature and is a $200.00-$300.00 add on.

Much better wood,albeit not great, than the CZ

Actions that are feeding and ejecting flawlessly.(Yes they did have some problems with their rifles in the past, who didn't, at least they addressed the issues).

They don't need bedding, to be accurate or to stop the stock from cracking.

Maineguide

The ph I was with had the Ruger and liked it better than the CZ. I voted for the Ruger on his behalf.

The difference between the posts and the voting is stunning. If you just read the posts you'd think the CZ would have won 80%+ of the votes but in fact it lost.

I'm surprised all of you Ruger "haters" have completely missed it's one true flaw. The terrible factory trigger. Fix that and the Ruger stands out. The CZ needs a better trigger also but not as badly as the Ruger. Overall I like my .416 Ruger and never plan to get rid of it. On the other hand I view CZ's as action donors for much more interesting calibers.-Rob

Rob,

PM sent on another CZ issue.