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.

Both of the 527's I spoke of are older 12 twist .223's owned by my brothers. As I said, they both shoot quite well now, just needed a little work.

What was the work?

Explained a few posts back. Have you done anything to yours ? I've been thinking of buying a 527 American in 6.5 Grendel myself. Don't know if I can get past that damned ugly trigger guard/magazine arrangement though.

OK, checked your post again.

Have not encountered any of those problems with my CZ rifles. In fact the first 3-shot group I shot at 100 yards with my 452 .17 HMR in 2002 measured .24 inch, right out of the box.

Have had similar OTB luck with 15-20 other CZs from rimfire to various centerfires. Have worked over or adjusted the triggers some, and did put a heavier magazine spring in my 550 Magnum .416 Rigby, but other than that they've been pretty much good to go.

I also shoot competition at my club. Sometimes we do "hunting" rifle shoots. They hated it when I pulled out my CZ 550, even though it was chambered in 9.3x62mm, it was still damn accurate. Of course I worked it over a bit:

I've shot perfect's with that rifle and also filled the freezer a time or 2:


Like I said earlier, there's a night and day difference between the heavy clunky CZ550 and the Tikka. Especially when you want to compare it to something like your superlite 6.5 creed. There are absolutely no flies on the superlite for a hunting rifle either, and they can be extremely accurate:


Don't expect your everyday right out of the box superlite to shoot like that though. It's not going to happen. If you are looking for an extremely accurate Tikka, that you could also possible hunt with that is closer in weight to the CZ550, look up the Tikka CTR. They shoot great. Almost effortless. I don't/won't take my CTR to one of our "hunting" rifle shoots, but will take it to our "precision" rifle shoots:


However, I do still feel a little guilty because it shots so well....:

I have a bunch of Tikkas, two of them are in 7mm-08. When you buy the Tikka let me know, I have load data for you.



P

I prefer the Tikka a lot more
The stocks on the CZs feel like clubs

They don’t all...many of the older cz/brno rifles had very trim stocks...similar to the Winchester 54. The Safari stocks are perfect imho...

Cz s are a European sporting Mauser...not designed to or intended to be a sub 7lb stainless synthetic mountain rifle. This comparison is foolish

My 527 in 17 Hornet would not feed out of the magazine, unless you were mad and really worked the bolt.


I think they used an extractor out of a 223 on it.

Wouldn't say a Tikka vs Howa comparison be more appropriate?

Not a gunwriter but I've owned both in .223. The Tikka I bought new. It was the basic, least expensive "Plastica" model. It was and still is the most accurate out of the box with several different loads rifle I've ever owned. Basically put a scope on it and start shooting. It seems like most shooters that get these say the same thing.

The CZ is an older 527, 18&1/2" barrel, 1-12 twist, walnut stock Carbine with good open sights. I've had it about a year. The only thing I've done to it is put a 2-7x33 scope on it. Getting mounts that weren't too high without altering or replacing the bolt handle was a hassle. I ended up using some old Tikka mounts. So far the only load it shoots real well is the 40 gr V-Max with 27 gr of Varmint Extreme but it will put 5 rounds and sometimes more into an inch at 100 yds consistently with that load.

I know alot of people around here with 527's and this is a common complaint/problem.

CZ obviously wants to be a big player in the American market but they keep fuuckin it up. The 557 stock is bulky/clubby. The overall styling leaves much to be desired. People bought 550's because it had a Mauser action so CZ comes out with a fat, overweight, push feed action with a two positon safety that doesn't lock the bolt to replace it. BRILLIANT ! Just what every American hunter wanted and needed, another heavy, two position safety push feed in a market already loaded with them . Same with the 527. It is a truly tiny, micro action. If CZ would do away with that dopey, ugly, steel trigger guard/bottom metal/magazine arrangement and put an aluminum triggerguard/floorplate or aluminum botton metal with flush fitting detachable magazine in it's stead, they could have a truly slick, good looking lightweight micro action sporter that would be very appealing to American hunters. Instead they have a micro action rifle that is neither good looking nor particularly light. Good job CZ, your engineering and marketing departments are right on the ball.

I have the older CZ550 American in .243. It's an accurate rifle as long as I stay with bullets < 87 grains. It's one heavy sporter than feels like a block. The length of pull is really long for me and I'm of average size. It has the set trigger which is nice on the bench; I'd never consider hunting with it set as it's too light. Fit and finish is more on par with Remington than Tikka/Sako. CZ does have good customer service. I bought a CZ 452 American prior to the 550 which is what sold me on CZ. They're decent rifles until you hit a certain price point and then there's better.

I have a 527 in .221 Fireball that feeds great.

A little work shaping my extractor and the 17 feeds great too.

I think they got them mixed up at the factory. Probably test fire with a single shot carrier.

BSA, funny I have the same rifles, in the same calibers.. The CZ550in 9.3X62 does the same thing. I have yet to shoot the Tikka Creedmoor but am expecting good things.

For varmint shooting the CZ527 magazine setup is perfect and feeds flawlessly. At least the examples in 204 and 223 I have do. The only thing I did to my 527's is taken some emory cloth to the magazine feed lips as they were scratching cases, which drove me nuts.

I haven’t commented per the CZs because it’s been years since I saw one and
am not looking.

I have 2 Tikka T3, one is T3x. Very Light, Well Balanced, Best, Easiest, No hassle, Out of the box accuracy I’ve
experienced in 47 yrs of messing with CF rifles.

I’ve had 3 Howas. 223, 270, 06. All were good shooters.

ALL were heavy ! ! That’s been my experience.


Jerry

If you like Rem, but not the current stuff take a look at Bergara. They are 700's done right. That said I own CZ rimfires and am a fan, have not tried the centerfires. Tikka just feels cheap to me-obviously subjective. They have a great reputation for accuracy, but so does Bergara and they feel better to me.