458 WM Zastava Owners?

conor_90

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
91   0   0
Location
NW BC
A few questions for the guys who own these.

1) are these rifles too light for the cartridge? all heroism aside an honest assessment of what a comfortable stock weight for a 458 wm is and if the zastava falls into that would be great.

2) Are the rifles barrel heavy and does this affect the balance? Or is the opposite true and the barrel is too skinny a profile for the round?

3) Are the stocks on the rifles built to handle the recoil impulse generated by the round?

Thanks
 
I have one and like it. Weight is comfortable to shoot. Only issue would be the stock that could crack. Be option to bed and put extra cross bolt in stock and make sure screws stay tight. Could also buy aftermarket stock. I put a b&c on mine and really like it
 
They really need to be well bedded. Id prefer a little more weight but i shoot often. If its solely a hunting gun the weight is fine i think. You never feel recoil shooting at a game animal anyway
 
Every time I want to go down this path I wonder if it would be cheaper all in to just buy a used win m70 or m98 that has bedding, pad, etc done already...
 
A few questions for the guys who own these.


3) Are the stocks on the rifles built to handle the recoil impulse generated by the round?

Thanks

I had posted the following on another post about 6 months ago:

My observations of a Zastava 458 Win Mag - bought new in 2014. As received from factory, there was clearance between the recoil lug and the stock cross bolt. I glass bedded that with Devcon Steel. I was surprised that there was only the action recoil lug - no recoil lug on the barrel, which I expected to see. (See Phil Shoemaker's discussion on the campfire site regarding his building of his "ole Ugly" - and how he installed a barrel recoil lug because of his concern that the 458 "is known" to break stocks.)

The stock's bulkhead at the rear of the mag well was very thin - about 1/8" or less, with about 3/16" clearance between rear of mag box and the bulkhead. There was a cavernous excavation in the stock to accommodate their trigger assembly, and then some. There was no rear cross bolt. Not surprisingly, within a couple years of sitting in the gun cabinet, there was a crack through that bulkhead, so nothing holding the stock together from front of mag well to rear tang. I built up about .030" thickness of masking tape on rear of magazine box and filled the gap with Devcon to reinforce the bulkhead. I like the two stage mauser triggers, when set up for nice clean two step trigger pull, so carved a block in the shape of the space needed for a military trigger to function, attached it to the action, and filled the trigger cavity with Devcon - that took three separate pours and well over a fluid ounce to get it filled. Laid a U-shaped metal strap in there a-la-Weatherby internal cross "bolt".

I had mounted an old time Redfield flip up aperture sight to the rear of the rear scope base. Removed the rear sight from the barrel - 2 - M3x0.5 screws and some red "loctite" holding it on - never did find slotted filler screws, so installed some allen head set screws, until I make some slotted ones.

Attempted to change out front sight to a fiber optic bead. Through my own klutziness, I discovered that the front sight is mounted with a shallow dovetail cut into the barrel, a "top hat" style insert that the front sight screw attaches to, and more "loctite" holding the ramp to the barrel. To boot, it is not a standard 3/8" dovetail on the sight ramp.

I do like the blued finish, but did not really fancy the longish skinny (to my eye) bolt handle, so swapped it out with a polished one from a Parker Hale magnum - it headspaces perfectly and at least 80%+ bearing on the recoil lugs. Mounted a Leupold M8-2.5x and I think it is ready to go. Next mod, for sure, will be a front sight that I can be sure will not go flying off into the bush when I really need it, probably a banded ramp that can be soldered in place.
 
Last edited:
I had an Interarms Whitworth in .458, a previous incarnation of the Zastava. While it certainly carried nicely, it really let you know when you fired it. It was just a smidge over 8 1/2#'s with a sling, full magazine, Leupold rings & bases and a B & L 1.5-6x20 scope. It had a pencil thin barrel for a 458. I could shoot 3 rounds standing and that was it. (I could do 10 with either my custom Ruger #1 in .500 N.E. or BRNO/CZ 416 Rigby) I was giddy / punch-drunk / dizzy, whatever you wanted to call it. The rifle was factory glass bedded at both recoil lugs (barrel band mounted 2nd recoil lug on the island base for the express sights and receiver recoil lug). After I had 2 Edwards recoil reducers installed in the stock and had the barrel mag-na-ported, it was sort-of manageable for longer range sessions. You don't want to ever shoot it without ear protection, so that screwed it for hunting! Finally, I gave up on it and sold it. I now have an 12# Parker-Hale 1100 African Magnum 458 (with a Kahles 1.1-4.5x24 on Warne bases, Leupold QRW rings, full magazine & sling) and while it is certainly not a light-weight to carry, although it balances very nicely, it does feel a whole bunch friendlier when the nut behind the trigger squeezes one off. The barrel on the Whitworth looked like 1/2 the diameter of the Parker-Hale. The Parker-Hale was used by a bunch of African countries' Professional Hunters. I don't think ANY countries used the Whitworth. Maybe the Zastavas are heavier?

My $0.02.
 
Back
Top Bottom