Have a CZ 550 Safari Magnum on order in .416 Rigby. Struggling with whether to spend the money to have the factory stock bedded to prevent possible splitting or simply purchasing the McMillan synthetic stock for the CZ 550 magnum action. Like the look of wood, but really concerned more about functionality (and not having a problem on my buff hunt this fall in Tanzania). Any thoughts? What have the experiences been of those that have put the McMillan on? True drop in fit? Fit and feel? Thanks.

The McMillian is NOT a true "drop-in-fit." I know that personally as I had to upgrade after my factory hogback split......you'll still have to glass bed the McMillian. Just my $0.02.

Well, that's not entirely true... The CZ 550 WILL infact simply drop into the McMillan stock and it will work sans bedding. Mine did! BUT (and this is a big but...) You won't get the best accuracy that way. McMillan recommends you bed the rifle...but also insists that the stock will work fine and has a full lifetime warranty whether you choose to bed it or not.
Pillar bedding isn't necessary if you do bed. The McMillan stocks are very solid throughout the entire action area and there is no measureable compression of the stock under compression from the stock screws... McMillan will pillar bed their stocks if you ask for it but they will also tell you it doesn't really do much.

My CZ 550 in .416 wears a MacMillan stock (grey paint job which I like), I ordered the "drop-in" model and it dropped right in. One can also have the stock mounted by MacMillan. I subsequently had it bedded and it improved accuracy. I think if I had to do it all over again I would have had MacMillan pillar bed it. I like to be able to seperate the stock from the barreled action when travelling to put it into a smaller case. I think the pillar bedding facilitates remounting with less impact on the zero being changed radically. I can't prove it however, just a suspicion.

Who has the for sale online?

MJines,

I think you could go either way with this one.

However, I have read enough reports on these forums of stocks problems/cracking etc. to take them seriously. If you do stick with the original factory stock most reports seem to indicate that with a good bedding job and cross bolts the rifle is much less prone to have these sort of problems. So, if you like the factory stock and it fits you well that may be an option.

If you are really concerned about use and abuse the McMillan maybe the way to go. They are certainly alot tougher than wood and scrathes and dings don't seem so bad. As for fit and feel...I can pass along the stock dimensions that McMillan sent to me...

The stock is a straight comb at ¾†at both nose and heel. The cast off is about ¼†and the toe out is about ¼â€. The comb is a pretty good compromise height for both iron sights and low mounted scopes.

I don't believe the cz factory model has any cast to the stock...if that matters to you.

If you do go with the McMillan I would certainly have it pillar bedded to get as stable/solid a platform as I could and wring the most of what the cz has to offer.


Wink, love that rifle. The grey stock really looks good.

Regards,
Dave

Wink, were did you get those scope rings? And have you had any problem with the scope shifting on those dovetails? I started a thread about those dovetails yesterday but have recieved zero feedback.

The rifle looks good in that stock, have you notice any difference in recoil? I have one in 375 and will probably have one installed on my rifle, the only thing I don't like is the "wimpy" bolt handle, any suggestions?

quote:

Originally posted by trekker111:
Wink, were did you get those scope rings? And have you had any problem with the scope shifting on those dovetails? I started a thread about those dovetails yesterday but have recieved zero feedback.

Didn't see your thread but those look like Talley's. I have a set and think they are more than adequate. They have a teat that fits into the rear bridge notch and can't shift. Mine are going on a 505 Gibbs and a 550 Magnum so in a short while I can report the good news or bad with some confidence.

quote:

Originally posted by gi:
The rifle looks good in that stock, have you notice any difference in recoil? I have one in 375 and will probably have one installed on my rifle, the only thing I don't like is the "wimpy" bolt handle, any suggestions?

All my CZs have had that handle cut off and replaced with an Oberndorf style. On average that runs around $75 US to $150 US depending on who does it.

It's a vanity for sure but I just don't like the look of that handle either.

quote:

Originally posted by woodsracer:
The McMillian is NOT a true "drop-in-fit." I know that personally as I had to upgrade after my factory hogback split......you'll still have to glass bed the McMillian. Just my $0.02.

I guess I should have clarified a bit more. They are a Drop In Fit, BUT, the front recoil lug is not used unless you BED IT.

In my rifle, around 20 rounds started making the tang area start cracking just enough to notice it. I have since stopped shooting it until I send it to a gunsmith (converted to a .338 Kahn, possibly), or until I relieve the tang and bed it myself.

Right now, I'll shoot my Ruger RSM when I need my Rigby fix.

There were a couple of questions to me. The rings are Talley with Quick Detachable levers. As previously mentioned there is a recoil lug on the rear mount which fits into a cutout on the receiver's dovetail. When you mount your scope make sure the ring lug is snug up to the front of the cutout, and not just in the middle somewhere. I have observed excellent return to zero on mine if I follow that procedure.



I bought my scope from Premier Reticles and had them mount the German N° 1 post.


If you do not bed the rifle immediately (ie. before shooting it at all) you will probably get a crack in the paint at the tang, as I did. This in fact is what pushed me to getting it bedded as the accuracy was OK for me without the bedding. Lastly, when I ordered my stock I was more worried about balance than weight. I asked MacMillan to fill the butt rather than leave it hollow. It does add a little weight but the long barrelled CZ will be too muzzle heavy in my opinion if you do not do this. For those who are recoil sensitive you might want to have them install some mercury recoil reducers in the stock. The pad is a Pachmayr Decelerator.

Wink,

More questions for you...

1. Where's the front sight hood?
Would Blue Loc-Tite hold it on?

2. Is there any danger of getting your off-hand cut by the sling swivel stud?
Would you entertain the idea of having it mounted at an angle at the front of the stock or switching to a bbl. band style?

3. What is the capacity of the .416 Rigby, including "+1"?

4. With this stock, would it be possible for Lon Paul, Gunmaker, to make a .458 Lott version such as the one 458Win had in a magazine article?
It was stamped "6 .458 Lott Cartridges", only I don't know if that was with the "+1" option...

4. How's the recoil on that beautiful gun you have there?!

The reason I've asked all these questions is that I've pretty much resigned myself to purchasing a CZ550 American Safari in a real 'Dangerous Game Cartridge' caliber.
The extra capacity; CRF; and 'Remington style 2-position safety' are my leading reasons for this gun.
I saw a picture years ago of a Lon Paul CZ/BRNO rifle done in .375 H&H, all in black with two scope option AND a removeable muzzle brake --- and it has remained in my mind as "THE DGR".
Only the caliber choice remains as my last stumbling block.
I hear on this Forum that the .458 Lott is the bottom rung of the "We band of Bubbas" ladder!

( by pure chance or fate, this post is #470...is that an omen? Should I be considering the .470 Mbogo or .470AR...? Ye, Gods! )

Busmaster, I took off the front sight hood because that is my personal preference. It stays on just fine and doesn't seem to creep off like the front sight hoods on the Model 70 Safari Express. I don't think you would need any Loctite. Concerning the front swivel stud, when you order the stock from MacMillan you have the option of leaving it off on the assumption you will have a barrel band front sling mount. I knew I was just going to leave the barrelled action in basically its factory configuration so asked for the front swivel on the fore-end. (It is possible to buy the barrelled action so you don't need to purchase the complete rifle if you know you are going to have it restocked, which is what I did. You may save a little money doing it this way). I doesn't bother me under recoil but we all hold our rifles with minor variations and what works for one may not work for another.
The fore-end mounted swivel also allows me to use the Ching Safari sling for shots where I want to stabilize with the sling with minimal change in zero. On my wooden stocked .375 H&H with the barrel mounted sling swivel, the zero changes significantly when using the sling to stabilize.
My CZ 550 Magnum holds 3 rounds in the magazine very comfortably. It is possible to force a 4th round in there but this aspect of CZ 550s is somewhat variable between rifles. A friend has the exact same rifle and his holds four down no problem. I think any CZ 550 can hold 4 down in .416 Rigby if you want it to. Depending on your particular rifle you may need to have a gunsmith check the feed rails, the magazine spring, the magazine box (mine came with the .375 box and is so marked)and the magazine trap door. Normally the rifle should hold 4+1.
I think the CZ 550 in .458 Lott should be able to hold 5+1, maybe 6+1 but this might be subject to the same variances I mentioned about the .416 but I don't own one so can't confirm. MacMillan can sell you the stock as a drop in for whatever factory caliber barrelled action the rifle is made in. If you are going to rebarrel it would preferable to send the barrelled action to MacMillan for a precise fit.
As for the recoil, well, it is a .416 Rigby. There is alot of powder behind that 400 grain bullet. The recoil doesn't bother me much but there are a few people at my gun club who have declined when offered a chance to shoot it. I think you should consider carefully the length of pull you want on the stock to make sure that you don't get whacked by the scope. This is much more painful, and potentially dangerous, then the felt recoil to the shoulder which I don't find excessive.

quote:

Originally posted by BusMaster007:

I hear on this Forum that the .458 Lott is the bottom rung of the "We band of Bubbas" ladder!

So, that leaves us .416 Rigby owners out of the Band of Bubbas???? If that is true, I NEED something bigger, because I have an inferiority complex and HAVE to fit in!!!

There's ALWAYS a good excuse to buy a new gun!

Hopefully this will be a pic of my 416 Rigby with Brockman laminated stock

Absolutely nothing I tried worked

zimbabwe,

Maybe it is just me, but I cant see the photo and very much would enjoy seeing it as I am considering one.

Many Thanks

HBH

I could not open the picture either and would love to see the laminated stock with the action mounted in it.

I've tried half a dozen times and don't know what I'm doing wrong. Asked for help tried it still didn't work. I'm giving up on posting pics. I got the avatar to work but not pics. Sorry it is a rather nice rifle if I do say so.

quote:

Originally posted by zimbabwe:
I've tried half a dozen times and don't know what I'm doing wrong. Asked for help tried it still didn't work. I'm giving up on posting pics. I got the avatar to work but not pics. Sorry it is a rather nice rifle if I do say so.

Here's the LINK to the pic of a stock like yours. It's a beautiful stock.

I have the model without the cheekpiece. I have a fat face and very short neck and close spaced eyes (wierd huh?) and that means a short stock (13 1/2) and no cheekpiece. My gun has barrel cut to 21" and NECG front ramp with red fiber optic bead adjustable for elevation installed. Bolt handle has been straightened and barrel band sling swivel installed. I have a Swarovski 1.5 x 4 Professional in CZ mounts. I have Warne on my 602 375 but the lug on the Warnes doesn't fit as well as the CZ's. Have never seen Talleys so don't know about them. The CZ's are VERY solid and don't look bad to me. I had Mr. Brockman leave off the front sling swivel and the recoil pad and he was very agreeable to this. I got the sanded drop in as I was going to cut stock and put on Decellerator and finish with Teak Oil. Turned out very nice but I may thin it some in the action area as I think it would look better. Worked well enough to take a nice 45# Ele in the Matetsi. Wish I could figure out the picture posting thing.

Here is a close-up of the Talley scope mount for CZ 550 Magnums. Nice machining, close tolerances, good quality in general. I have no complaints.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
Here is a close-up of the Talley scope mount for CZ 550 Magnums. Nice machining, close tolerances, good quality in general. I have no complaints.

Those Talleys look GREAT!!! My ONLY complaint it that they look like the integral recoil lug is not wide enough to fill the lug cutout on the action. Have you noticed any slippage with those mounts?

Those Talley's look much better than the old Warnes I have on my 375 602. They are equally as full as the CZ's I have on my 550. The front edge is the only one that really counts and it looks like it fits firmly in the recess. The Warnes on my 375 actually upset the metal on recoil because the lug on the ring was not thick enough and tapered from back to outside. The other problem is you really have to lock down on the levers to keep them from slipping on the dovetails. A little locktite under the ring where it contacts the top of action solves that. Have had NO problems with the CZ's but think I will order a couple of pairs of Talley's.

Woodsracer, since there is sufficient room in the lug cutout to allow some creep, when I mount the scope I push it (or let it slip) forward snug against the front surface, before tightening it down. This is quite simple; I just point the muzzle toward the ground and tighten. If the lugs were a very tight fit it would only complicate getting the scope on quickly as you would constantly be fiddling to line it up correctly. I think Talley's approach is the right one when you are intending to take the scope off and put it back on with any frequency.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
Woodsracer, since there is sufficient room in the lug cutout to allow some creep, when I mount the scope I push it (or let it slip) forward snug against the front surface, before tightening it down. This is quite simple; I just point the muzzle toward the ground and tighten. If the lugs were a very tight fit it would only complicate getting the scope on quickly as you would constantly be fiddling to line it up correctly. I think Talley's approach is the right one when you are intending to take the scope off and put it back on with any frequency.

I never thought about it like that! I am usually a "Benchrest Shooter" and tend to like things NICE AND TIGHT, but your comments make complete sence to me. Thanks for educating me!!!