Need Help Picking the Right .22 LR

I just read the whole thread, and even though it's been said already...

CZ452 American is probably the best choice, even used...which is probably how you'll find one these days. I'd only consider a 455 (or a new 457) if 452s couldn't be had. These have no iron sights, and the lighter-taper barrel. Better for long carries, shooting off-hand, improvised rests like tree branches, etc. I love my 452 Varmint, but I shoot prone with it. (bench rarely) Basically, always supported by a bipod or heavy bags.

BRNO 2E or CZ452 LUX (basically the same gun) are both superb rifles, are equipped with good iron sights. You can mount scopes on them, but I wouldn't recommend it. The stock shape/cheek weld is designed to have your eye low to the stock for best results with the irons. Mount a scope on there, and neck strain is your reward. lol

Savage B22~I actually held one of these for the first time on the weekend. I think these could be seriously considered if you didn't have the budget for a CZ, but I don't know anyone who (given the chance) would pick the Savage over a CZ if money wasn't a concern. One oozes quality, the other does not. I've owned Savage 22s and their accuracy can be very good...but my personal experience is that the CZ 452's accuracy WILL be good, period. I will ad that I actually want to try a B22 in 22WMR, so I'm not that put off by them. Huge improvements over the previous Mark II series guns.

Scopes~get the best you can afford. I like scopes AO or side focus, but in spite of that...sprung for one of the new-ish Leupold Freedom Rimfire 3-9X scopes recently. I haven't shot with it yet (sitting on a new-to-me CZ452 American btw) but really like what I see. The previous, new scope I bought for a 22 was a Sightron S1, 4-12 AO with their HHR reticle. (hunter holdover reticle if memory serves) That scope sits on my 452 Varmint, and is my main gopher rig.
 
metalbender said:
Lots of keyboard shooters should be in the olympics
Click to expand...

This is the kind of dishonest rhetoric that hurts the shooting sports.

You don’t have to be an Olympic shooter to outshoot most .22lr rifles. The difference in accuracy between rimfire rifles is huge.This isn’t a hard concept to prove.

Take any shooter and give them an accurate rifle(Anschutz,Kidd, whatever). Let them print some groups at 50 yards. Take note of the size of the grouping.This gives a rough indication of the accuracy of the shooter (plus the accuracy of the rifle)

Next give them a regular .22 (Savage,Ruger,Remington). Let them print more groups at 50 yards.Notice how the group size got way bigger? This error isn’t from the shooter. It’s purely the accuracy of the rifle. It’s not hard to outshoot a lot of.22

The inherent accuracy of many .22 is much less than people admit. No matter the skill level of the shooter they benefit greatly by having an accurate rifle.I would recommend anybody focus on finding an accurate rifle.
 
The average shooter likely wouldn't get any better results with a high quality rifle, the discipline just isn't there. The op wasn't looking for a match rifle. The 452 will do everything needed in capable hands. Personally have four 452's, two Anschutz 64's and an Anschutz 1710 for comparison.
 
metalbender said:
The average shooter likely wouldn't get any better results with a high quality rifle, the discipline just isn't there. The op wasn't looking for a match rifle. The 452 will do everything needed in capable hands. Personally have four 452's, two Anschutz 64's and an Anschutz 1710 for comparison.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous. The accuracy of any shooter with any gun is a combination of the error introduced by both shooter and gun. If the best you can hold is a 10-inch group, and the gun can shoot a one-inch group, you will produce 11-inch groups on average. If you can hold a 1-inch group, shooting that same one-inch rifle, you will see on average 2-inch groups. No matter how good or bad the shooter may be, he or she will shoot better groups with a more accurate rifle. The better the shooter, the greater the perceived benefit of a more accurate gun. A poor shooter won't see as much improvement with a more accurate rifle, but it's still there.
 
Some great information here that has definitely helped. Can anyone comment on what fair prices are for a used 452 or 455? Assuming it is in very good or better condition and no scope. From looking at scope prices I can see the breadth of choice and price.

I should add that I handled a 455 Lux this past weekend and I like the fit and feel of CZ. Also, it looks like a CZ will more than suffice for my intended use.
 
Last edited:
Yup, you nailed it. Even though I,ve stepped up to a 1710, which makes me wonder why I have all the others, my 452's are in their forever home. I still take one out along with the Annie for gopher shooting.
 
metalbender said:
Yup, you nailed it. Even though I,ve stepped up to a 1710, which makes me wonder why I have all the others, my 452's are in their forever home. I still take one out along with the Annie for gopher shooting.
Click to expand...

As a CZ lover...I'd never admit to most of what goes through my mind when I shoot my 64 MPR TT. lol Among the thoughts are; "a model 64 action sporter with this trigger is something I should seriously consider" :) I avoid Anschutz/Nordic SO much that I can't honestly even say if they put their 64 actions into sporting rifles! lol I'm sure they do, but I have to let someone more responsible hold my credit card when I browse Anschutz rifles. :)
 
metalbender said:
Bought my first Anschutz, a CIL 310, 44 years ago. Still functions perfect. Whopping $87 at the time.
Click to expand...

I hear you metalbender~the first firearm I bought myself (not the first I've owned) was 28-29 years ago, an Anschutz 1450. I paid $289 for it, unfired from an estate. Trigger isn't great and can't be upgraded from what Anschutz tells me...but I still own, and shoot that rifle. I'll never sell it either. I didn't even own a computer at the time, and had no idea of how to gauge the value was good...but the gun looked new, said "Anschutz" on it, made in Germany...figured it was a low-risk purchase. :)
 
If its mostly target shooting a savage mark2 in a mdt chassis is a great option. I love mine. I also use it for small game hunting. Its on the heavier side but balances well
Another un mentioned option is a henry lever action if thats your thing
 
Even accurate 22's can be distracted by different ammo.
Mr. H and I proved this a few years back.
That sure was a fun day tossing different labelled lead downstream
with a variety of shooters and different ammo.
Results were eye opening.

One thing I did find was my rifles printed tighter groups with Mr. H
shooting them.
 
This is why every shooter needs at least a dozen or more quality rimfires. That way, not matter what ammo goes on sale, you will probably have something that shoots it well! :)

Wow...can I rationalize, or what? :)
 
metalbender said:
The average shooter likely wouldn't get any better results with a high quality rifle, the discipline just isn't there. The op wasn't looking for a match rifle. The 452 will do everything needed in capable hands. Personally have four 452's, two Anschutz 64's and an Anschutz 1710 for comparison.
Click to expand...

I am confused. Are you saying you can’t tell the accuracy difference between your 452’s and your 1710, or are you an exceptional shooter?
 
jjohnwm said:
This is why every shooter needs at least a dozen or more quality rimfires. That way, not matter what ammo goes on sale, you will probably have something that shoots it well! :)

Wow...can I rationalize, or what? :)
Click to expand...

I tried your logic on the Wife....didn't go well.
 
A little off topic but, I'm always more than happy to let someone at the range give the 1710 a go. If a shooter doesn't get good results with it, they need to get some more trigger time. In all fairness though, the gun is set up for my size and shooting style. Hard to shoot another's gun without dialing it in to your preference. The difference between the 1710 and 452's at twenty yards is slight, but consistantly better. My winter indoor shooting is limited to the pistol range. Out in the gopher patch, the results are very similar, dead gophers out to 100-125 yrds.
 
metalbender said:
A little off topic but, I'm always more than happy to let someone at the range give the 1710 a go. If a shooter doesn't get good results with it, they need to get some more trigger time. In all fairness though, the gun is set up for my size and shooting style. Hard to shoot another's gun without dialing it in to your preference. The difference between the 1710 and 452's at twenty yards is slight, but consistantly better. My winter indoor shooting is limited to the pistol range. Out in the gopher patch, the results are very similar, dead gophers out to 100-125 yrds.
Click to expand...

20 yards is not indicative of accuracy in a .22lr.

“Dead golphers out to 100-125 yards” isn’t a indicative of accuracy either.

You certainly don’t have to be an Olympic shooter to tell a 1710 outshoots a 452.The statement that a 452 does what 99% of shooters are capable of is blatantly false.

This nonsense is the reason why there is so many.22 lr guns that have garbage accuracy. No matter the skill level, many of the common.22 lr are not accurate.People are quick to blame the shooters skill level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom