nowarningshot
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I've had three 452 varmits. Both were capable of more than me. Write your name accurate. Very interesting.
CZ Varmint: 452 vs 457
- Thread starter slinkylegs
- Start date
I sold my 452 Varmint last summer, I think for about $650? Had it since 2016, very accurate rifle. I'll likely regret selling it at some point.
I kept a 20" Tikka T1x in a walnut Hunter stock, every bit as accurate as the CZ and I just liked the Tikka more than the CZ.
At $750 with rings, the 452 you mentioned is slightly overpriced. With really nice wood, if it was a good shooter it'd be worth that much in my opinion, though.
I don't like the 457's, but I'm in the minority when it comes to that.
I kept a 20" Tikka T1x in a walnut Hunter stock, every bit as accurate as the CZ and I just liked the Tikka more than the CZ.
At $750 with rings, the 452 you mentioned is slightly overpriced. With really nice wood, if it was a good shooter it'd be worth that much in my opinion, though.
I don't like the 457's, but I'm in the minority when it comes to that.
slinkylegs
Regular
- Location
- Hudson Bay, SK
Very interesting! What makes you dislike the 457? Genuinely curious about that
slinkylegs
Regular
- Location
- Hudson Bay, SK
That is my biggest hangup to be honest. The bolt lift thing is secondary, more of an annoying thing with a large scope, but the safety thing could throw me. I generally work off muscle memory, so being used to the 457 could actually pose a danger lol. It would be the same if I got used to the 452/455's I suppose.
In my opinion, CZ's barrel quality is truly hit or miss in recent years, and has been since the 455 replaced the 452. 10% are outstanding, 10% are poor, and the rest fall into the average middle ground.
To be fair, many shooters are happy with average, and most of the outstanding rifles in the top 10% are never used to their full potential.
At the same price point as a 457, very few Tikka T1x's are ever accused of being poor shooters. Their downside is the synthetic stock to get them to that price point.
You can replace the Tikka synthetic with whatever stock you want, which is what I did with mine. That adds to the cost, of course, but you get a good shooting rifle at the end of the day, pretty much guaranteed. Fit and finish is typical Tikka, which is very good.
To put it plainly, if you picked up, handled, and shot my Tikka with a walnut Hunter stock (from EE at about $250) and a CZ 457 American, I doubt you'd buy the CZ.
I've owned several CZ's and the 452 Varmint was the best one.
Many will have a different opinion, but that's mine.
Leuchtkafer
Member
I'd echo that sentiment on the barrel variation. Being hammer forged you'd think they'd be more consistent barrel to barrel, but on the other hand their chamber and crown work can be pretty rough. I consider them project rifles to be fitted with a nice custom barrel, it'd be nice if one could just buy the action only.
I agree with Sean (Chilly807). The best shooting CZ bolt action rimfire rifles I've had have been 452 models (453 models too, but of course they have barrels that could have easily ended up on 452s). None of the 455 or 457 rifles I've had seemed to shoot as well.
I don't know whether the poorer performance of the 455/457s was related to the barrel attachment differences or to a greater likelihood of getting a barrel that wasn't on the right side of the bell curve.
And it's fair to say that many shooters are happy with average, and there's nothing wrong with that. To add to that, despite the posts seen on various forums, it's not as easy and straightforward as many of them make it seem to definitively determine how well any rifle shoots.
Leuchtkafer makes a good point about CZs quality issues. When he posted on CGN as RabidM4U5 he demonstrated as sound an understanding of CZ bolt action rimfires as seen on this forum.
Hey Gents, based on this thread if looking to pick up a new to me CZ .22 for target shooting it seems hunting down a good condition 452 used may be the better alternative then picking up a new 457. Talking to some club mates sounds like its pretty hard to shoot out a .22 barrel and if mechanics are in good order the 452 may be the more reliable shooter, thoughts? Mainly looking to use the gun for small bore silhouette.
It does take a lot of shooting to wear out a .22LR barrel, much more than the average shooters will undertake. Many barrels become inaccurate due to lack of cleaning. Clean with a cleaning rod and correct bore guide.
This should be a non issue. Relying on "muscle memory" is unreliable. Regardless, if it is your one and only gun, or if you have many types of firearms, both long and handguns, you need to consciously operate your safety be a deliberate tactile engage/disengage or confirm visually. Doing so will never leave you wondering "is it on?" or miss that shot of a life-time because you forgot to disengage it.
I have never had the pleasure of shooting a Tika, but will soon. One of my friends just got one. I have watched a lot of comparative videos where Tikas and CZs have been reviewed. Not sure how biased they are, but most demonstrate an accuracy advantage with the CZ. I've owned a bunch of CZ 455s a Brno 4, a really pretty 452 Lux in highly figured walnut; all amazing shooters. The ones I still have are the 452 and a 455 supermatch. I like the 455 so much I have just ordered a MDT Oryx Chassis for it.
I think you'd be hard pressed to evidence based prove one more reliable than the other.
Some will insist that the 452 MUST be more accurate and reliable because the barrel isn't held on by 2 screws. <shrug>The one thing that may be a consideration for you is that the 452 varmint barrel is tapered, making it ok for hunter class in silhouette.
Edit: I should add, don't take my word for it, do your own research, but I've been told that's the case for hunter class.
Last edited:
