Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Tikka vs CZ

I'm planning to purchase a 7mm/08. I'm NOT going to get a Remington as the last CDL that I bought had big time extraction issues that Remington tried to fix but didn't. I sent it to Long Rifles Inc. and they did an excellent job. I have a couple of Tikka's and I'm very satisfied with them. Nice trigger, and very, very accurate, but I'd like some feed back about the Cz from people that have one.
Thank you,
Mike

[spoiler][/spoiler]These are not comparable products. What are looking for in terms of features

Also...what model cz?

I have both, and have had several of each. Tikka's T3, T3x. The CZ's were all CZ550's and has been said, apples and oranges. Both are good rifles and accurate, but different in scope. Walnut and blue vice black and synthetic.

I have a few of each. If you like Mausers then the CZ is for you. It is heavier then the Tikka, but very solid, and again walnut and blued steel. I believe a much better built rifle. Both are very accurate.

Tikkas are smooth and shoot good. Lots of plastic though.

Ummm, I have a walnut/blue Tikka. They do still make them that way. Tikkas are smooth, refined and held to vey uniform, tight tolerances. CZ's are all steel but rough and unrefined compared to Tikka. If you want a rifle that shoots lights out and is ready to hunt out of the box, Tikka is without question the way to go. If you are allergic to synthetic bits on your rifle and don't mind doing a bit of refinement to make it hunt ready, CZ's may be better for you.

Yes, and actually CZ makes them in synthetic. I don't know that I would call a CZ unrefined. We would need to know what models the OP is asking about.

Both are nice rifles but I prefer the Tikka for accuracy and a nice light weight.

Tikka refined?
CZ 550 rough?

Wow. I’m out of this post

Yeah, there's a lot of dope smoking going on in this thread. As you pointed out earlier, the OP needs to step up to the plate and let us know exactly what models he's asking about. There's a night and day difference between most Tikka's and CZ's... Lets hear from the OP on what rifle's he's considering. Then a better comparison can be made..

I have a couple of what I consider " target rifles" for informal competition at our local gun club. Remington action, Jewel triggers, Krieger barrel. A very accurate 308 and a 6x47 Lapua. Both with high power scopes. Now that summer is over I like to shoot my factory stock, sporter rifles as I occasionally do throughout the summer months. I currently have a Tikka T3 in 6.5 Creedmoor. Blue/Walnut which I prefer (I know I'm a dinosaur),although my target guns are glass. I have NO complaints with the Tikka, as right out of the box it shoots as good or better than any Remington I ever owned. I did change the trigger spring, although it really didn't need it. I just want to get a 7mm/08 and some one of the guys has a CZ and said it was the most accurate sporter he ever shot. I think it was a 550.

My experience is that both brands shoot VERY well, and are so close in quality that which will be more accurate in a particular cartridge will depend on the individual rifle, not the factory.

Have owned a number of super-accurate centerfire rifles in various chamberings from both brands--but haven't yet shot one of the Tikka rimfires, so dunno about them.

CZ makes a 550 and 557. The 550 is crf. The 557 is a push feed. Seems like most here are referring to the 550. The 557 is offered in 7mm-08. Not sure if the 550 ever was.

CZ 557 American

SPECIFICATIONS

Product Name CZ 557 American Short Action 7mm-08
SKU 04837
Firearm Type Rifle
Purpose Hunting
MSRP $871.00
Chambering 7mm-08
Magazine Capacity 4
Magazine Type Detachable Box
Stock Turkish Walnut, American-Style, Oil Finish
Length Of Pull 13.75 in
Sights No Sights, Integrated 19mm Dovetails
Barrel Cold Hammer Forged
Barrel Length 24 in
Overall Length 44 in
Weight 7.05 lbs
Trigger Mech Fully Adjustable
Safety Two-Position, Push-To-Fire

I have a Tikka 270 and a 30-06. I have a full stock CZ 550 in 270. They all shoot very well,moa or better with factory ammo.

They also feed and function perfectly. Can't go wrong with either.

The Tikkas are a good bit lighter but the CZ has the feel of a nice european mauser sporter.

Apples and Oranges but both nice rifles.

The Tikka's are lighter, and perhaps easier to get to shoot well. By that I mean the CZ's also shoot very well but might need more load development to find the loads that they like best. Tikka's seem to shoot most anything well. Once a good load is found the CZ's are the equal to the Tikka's in accuracy. At least the several ones I have had. My CZ's were 550's. Don't know about the new 557.

The CZ 550 is heavier than Tikka!
However, I really like the single set trigger. So, I would slightly prefer this to a Tikka in a high recoil caliber. In a low recoil caliber, say .270 or less I would prefer a Tikka.

The push feed model CZ557 does not interest me very much, don't care for the looks.

Right?

BTW, CZ no longer makes the 550. It was superseded by the 557.

We have two 550's and two 527's in the family. The 527's in particular were rough/balky at feeding cartridges from mag to chamber and marked up brass pretty bad. They needed some polishing and mag adjustment to smooth the feeding. The barrel on one was off center in the channel enough to need some relieving on one side. The crown on one 550 looked like it was done by a drunken teenager with the corner of a brick. All have been glass bedded and polished up and shoot quite decently now. My Tikka's are the only rifles I own that I've done absolutely nothing to. No bedding work, no trigger adjustment, no nothing. They simply didn't need anything. Both shoot sub MOA with several different bullets/loads and .5 MOA with some. There are several other Tikka's owned by friends and family that I know do about as well. As far as I know, they're all pretty much the way they came from the box.

Well, kinda. The 550 is still available in the African series.

The 557's are also TANKS. Heavy, fat, bulky. But then the 550's weren't exactly svelte lightweights either. That's PART of what I meant when I said Tikka's are more refined. The 557's are a club in comparison.

Blackheart,

Don't know when you bought your 527's, but I have had several, including my present .17 Hornady Hornet, and an older model .22 Hornet that was rechambered to .22 Hornet. None have had any problem feeding ammo, and both the .17 HH and .22 KH would easily put 5 shots in 1/2" at 100 yards consistently. (Well, should say the .17 HH still will, despite being my primary prairie dog rifle in recent years. Sold the K-Hornet to somebody who wanted it more than I did, as I consider the .17 a superior varmint round.)

Have owned several 550's in chamberings from .270 Winchester to 9,3x62 Mauser., and all would group 3 shots into 1/2" at 100 yards with the right load--which was never hard to find. Have only owned a couple of 557's, but the first was a .308 that averaged UNDER 1/2" for three, 3-shot groups right out of the box, using a handload that has grouped well in a number of .308's.

The ONLY centerfire CZ I've owned that wouldn't consistently group into 1/2" at 100 yards was my .416 Rigby 550 Magnum--which still shot 1" with several kinds of ammo, including factory. But that may have been due to the nut behind the bolt.