casually looking at the CZ550 american in 9.3 x 62 yesterday, something I do not need at all found me looking at a close to $800 price tag! A Ruger 338 Compact magnum is almost $200 less, it must be the exchange rate as I just cannot see that the CZ is a better rifle than the Ruger.

forged vs cast receiver

You also should compare guns chambered for the same or a similar cartridge.

I think CZ's are some of the finest built firearms on the planet... as for $200 more than a Ruger, that's all personal preference but I'm sure you could find the CZ at a better price if you shopped around.

the alaskan in 375 Ruger is about the same price but sorry I cannot acccept that argument, a 223 Kimber Montana costs more than a CZ9.3 x 62, seems like they were just $600 a couple of years ago!

CZ's have gone up 20-30% in the past year or so due to the exchange rate.

Very nice guns, but they are getting spendy.

I am thinking exchange rate as well...too bad a nice rifle for $600.

Dont know how you could say that. They got poor triggers, rough actions and tolerences are poor. Open sights are ugly and in the lighter calibers (375H&H) they are darned heavy.

I would take a Ruger any day......

I saw a CZ 550 450 Rigby here in Australia a few days ago. Its sells here for $3600 Australian - $3100 USD approximately - and I would not pay &1500 dollars for it. Action was like there was sand in it.

About the only advantage they have is that big deep magazine.

And to think I gave $490 for a new CZ550 just a few years ago.

Thus why I stated "I think", personal opinion based on several experiences, granted more so along the pistol line than rifle. YMMV

Jimmy,

Go for the 338 Ruger Mag. My son was talking to me yesterday about buying one, and I advised him to go for it!!! (Another rifle I'll be loading for...LMAO)

I chose my CZ 550 American in .30-06 over a comparable Ruger 77 (pre Hawkeye).

I agree that CZ rifles are getting pricey, but they are one heck of a rifle. However, at the $800 price point i would look at other options along with CZ, but at $500-$600, i think its one of the best available.

To me the Ruger 77 and CZ 550 are comparables in the market, but in my opinion, CZ is a better, more refined copy of the mauser 98, and is of better quality.

Also true is that their actions are not super slick when new, but they wear in nice and are not sloppy like Rugers...i would also say that as far as tolerances go, CZ's are much tighter than Ruger's.

And the SS trigger on CZ's is a great trigger, and gives you 2 in 1. If you want a standard trigger you can adjust out the SS option or simplty not use it. Mine was sent back to the factory and tuned...what i got back is one of the cleanest triggers i have felt, and all that was done was adjustments, no stoning or polishing. It was a little gritty when i got it, but still better than most other factory triggers out there.

Every rifle has faults, i just think CZ is less faulty. My opinion only...

DW

CZ's quality varies, its best to handle the actual rifle in mind. Some feel like a masterpeice, some well....

Still havent ran across one that wont shoot well and feed. As far as the price, the dollar is down. Like others have said, for the $, I like a M70 or a used Sako.

1. The Chinese are buying them all up.
2. The government won't allow drilling for them in our coastal waters.
3. The recent hurricanes have shut down production.

There is absolutely no comparison in a Ruger vs CZ. Every CZ I have shot, shoots lights out. There aren't as smooth out of the box but they are solid dependable rifles. A little heavier than I like. But I will put up with that any day compared to the frustrations I have had with Ruger rifles. If want to to put some extra time and money into one, they will compete with any rifle out there. They are "best buy" in my book, although the prices have gone up.

I have had problems with about every Ruger Rifle I ever owned. It didn't take me long to figure out to quit buying them, and let the Ruger fans have at them. Just last month, got through working out the bugs on a Ruger rifle my nephew has. I gave it to him for graduation. I tried to talk him into another rifle, CZ or Remington, but he would have nothing of it. He wanted a Ruger like his Dad. Yes, I had to work on that one too, to get it to shoot.

You forgot spending eight years under a bush didn't help, either.

they are OK in accuracy, my personal copy was good for a FS gun, but rough as a cobb and now for $800! Ruger Alaskan looks more promising, gosh I don't need one of either!

I'd just kinda found out about CZ's around a year ago. I remember looking at their .22's when they were around 200.00 and was young/dumb enough to think that when other bolt .22's were twice that, that the CZ must be junk.

I picked up a 527 Hornet and a 452 in .22lr last year when they were just starting to jump in price and in that time span they jumped up again.

Even as good as they are, they're starting to price themselves out of some markets.

................There are always a few bad apples in every barrel, regardless of rifle maker. Your bad luck Rugers were by chance older models when Ruger was out-sourcing their barrel manufacturing? Or were they the newer versions? From the box, what were your groupings like with factory ammo? With reloads?

Interestingly, both my Rugers (Frontier and Alaskan) with certain powder combos, which have shown to be the best reloading combos for the rifles, consistently shoot moa and less. Between the two, the only modification from NIB, was to replace the Frontier`s trigger assembly, as the factory trigger had a 5# + pull along with some creap, which now has a 3# pull with no creap.

From the box, one friend of mine who bought a new 300 RCM Hawkeye compact earlier this year, has gotten good accuracy results from factory ammo and very good accuracy results from his reloads, while two others, one with a newer 338 Federal Hawkeye and the other with a newer 358 Win Hawkeye are also very satisfied.

I got lucky. I got on the CZ bandwagon very early on. My 550 was not expensive seven years ago. 'Course it was free for me- ahh having great friends is certainly a blessing. Best birthday surprise ever. Another thing I jumped on early was the Meopta scopes. I topped the CZ with a 6x42 Meopta to make a nice Czech pairing. Both are now quite a bit more money. Thinking I did good.

I think Ruger is a fine rifle, I'm just simply a fan of CZ. I will agree however that they are pricing themselves into a whole other market group.

A CZ 550 is a decent $400 rifle, but it's not a $800 rifle. I bought a CZ 550 american in 30-06 few years back when I had my FFL, $375 wholesale if I remember right. Out of the box I have to admit I wasn't too impressed, the stock needed about a pound more wood taken off of it and a decent finish instead of the stuff they stained it with. I wasn't impressed with the set trigger, too complicated and unneeded on a hunting rifle, and the supplied scope rings looked like they were only half finished, very rough. It shot okay, 1.5" groups, but no better than most out of the box bolt actions. It's not a mauser but has a lot of mauser features. A true M98 action is more desirable in my opinion. All in all I didn't hate it but it didn't impress me that much. A decent working rifle but nothing to get all wet about. I wouldn't look twice at one for $800, there are much nicer rifles out there for that money.

The CZ 550 is "not a Mauser"?

Anyway, I too got mine about 7 years ago for $400. Action is very smooth (jeweled bolt) and trigger is good for a factory rifle...shoots great too.

Wood is nothing to write home about though there might be some good figure hiding under that thick finish!

It is my only hunting rifle but I can't imagine $800 for one...I doubt I'd pay that much for any hunting rifle. Heck even Savage rifles are going up these days!

No, it's not. Many on these forums like to describe it as a mauser action but it's no more so than a springfield 1903 or a M70 winchester. It's got some similar features but many differences also. It's very much a stretch to say a CZ550 is a mauser action.

Depends. The Mauser 98 pretty much set the pattern for every bolt action rifle ever made after that in many respects. It was revolutionary at the time it came out. Just about any bolt action sporting rifle out there, except for something like a Blaser, can loosely be described as a Mauser 98 type action. Of course most mean by that, a 98 style CRF rifle, and some will only use that description if it's essentially identical to the original military or sporting Oberndorf Mauser 98 action. I guess we can place you in that last category.

I don't know what makes it "not a Mauser" but i always heard it describrd as a Mauser action with some "improvements". Then again I suppose that would be subjective.

I would be interested to know what the differences are?

bigsqueeze,

I know there are a lot of Ruger fans out there. I have just become soured on them. Life's too short and there are other brands.

I know Ruger makes a quality product, you just can't prove it by my history, and yes, my nephew's rifle was purchased this past spring.

So, if it's my money, I would choose CZ over the Ruger.

The main difference is probably the location and/or design of the ejector. Probably not much else.