Today, for the first time, I held two CZ-858s - one folder, one solid stock.
I had already had in my hands a VZ-58 with an 11", or so, barrel, but this time I had the opportunity to compare it side-by-side to the two CZ-858s.
After reading so much on CGN about the CZ-858, I must say that I was more than a bit disappointed with its "wood", the paint and the external machining of the metal parts. I'm 6'6" tall and the LOP on both stock versions was waay to short for me. Are Czech soldiers all dwarfs or something? Is the design the way it is in order to get the eye as close as possible to the rear sight?
Did I forget to say that that rough, reddish wood is very ugly? If I did, I'm sorry. It's more than ugly. It's repulsive.
Anyway, the SA VZ-58 had precisely the opposite effect on me (except for its short LOP with a folder which is, except for color, remarkably similar to he one on the 858). To use an automotive expression, the "fit and finish" of VZ was very impressive -- even exciting. Everything about it said "quality".
The clerk with whom I dealt said he owns an 858 but, nevertheless, he agreed with every observation I made when comparing the 858 to the 58.
I had gone to the store on Saturday to look at some Ruskie and Chinese SKSs, but was sidetracked by another customer standing next to me who just happened to be handling the relatively tiny 58. After that person was done looking at it, I dropped the SKS and picked up the 58. The first thing I said was "wow, what a fantastic little rifle!" The quality of construction looked almost as good as that of the Russian SKSs, and I think that is quite a feat.
The 858, OTOH, made me glance longingly back at the SKS. For example, The machining just about everywhere on the 858 is, for lack of a better expression, not as "fine" as that on the VZ-58. And I also took a brief look at the 858's bayonet. Yikes, compared to the Russian bayonet........well, you know what I'm going to say.
Of course what I did today had absolutely nothing to do with the actual operational performance of the 58 and 858 (or SKS, for that matter). Maybe all the things that I thought were undesirable on the 858 make it an absolutely fantastic performing firearm. And maybe that fact by itself makes everything about it suddenly become beautiful. After all, it is a firearm, not a beauty-pageant contestant.
Anyway, the reason I've written this is that the sales clerk told me that the VZ-58 is indeed available in a non-restricted, non-chrome version, but, if it's like its short-barrel brother, it's going to be an expensive bugger. (He has none in stock, but he'll have a quote and availability for me tomorrow, so I don't know how steep the price actually will be.)
So, before I plunk down a few hundred more on a VZ than I would on the CZ, I need to get some input from owners of the non-restricted SA VZ-58.
As far as looks goes, you already know which I prefer. (The NR VZ also comes standard with a comfortable pistol grip, forearm, adjustable-length plastic stock and, if it's like its short-barrel brother, a rail on the left side of the receiver that can be the base for an optical sight. I suppose these features account for some of the difference in price between the VZ and CZ.)
What I really need to know is whether VZ-58 performs as well as the 858 in the field. If it does, I'd be willing to spend the extra bucks just to have what to me is a much better looking firearm that I'll admire every time I pick it up or clean it. If it's got problems that the 858 does not have, I'm a very practical person, so I'll drop it like a hot potato(e). (And just how I'd proceed after that, I really do not know.)
Thanks for any advice.
I had already had in my hands a VZ-58 with an 11", or so, barrel, but this time I had the opportunity to compare it side-by-side to the two CZ-858s.
After reading so much on CGN about the CZ-858, I must say that I was more than a bit disappointed with its "wood", the paint and the external machining of the metal parts. I'm 6'6" tall and the LOP on both stock versions was waay to short for me. Are Czech soldiers all dwarfs or something? Is the design the way it is in order to get the eye as close as possible to the rear sight?
Did I forget to say that that rough, reddish wood is very ugly? If I did, I'm sorry. It's more than ugly. It's repulsive.
Anyway, the SA VZ-58 had precisely the opposite effect on me (except for its short LOP with a folder which is, except for color, remarkably similar to he one on the 858). To use an automotive expression, the "fit and finish" of VZ was very impressive -- even exciting. Everything about it said "quality".
The clerk with whom I dealt said he owns an 858 but, nevertheless, he agreed with every observation I made when comparing the 858 to the 58.
I had gone to the store on Saturday to look at some Ruskie and Chinese SKSs, but was sidetracked by another customer standing next to me who just happened to be handling the relatively tiny 58. After that person was done looking at it, I dropped the SKS and picked up the 58. The first thing I said was "wow, what a fantastic little rifle!" The quality of construction looked almost as good as that of the Russian SKSs, and I think that is quite a feat.
The 858, OTOH, made me glance longingly back at the SKS. For example, The machining just about everywhere on the 858 is, for lack of a better expression, not as "fine" as that on the VZ-58. And I also took a brief look at the 858's bayonet. Yikes, compared to the Russian bayonet........well, you know what I'm going to say.
Of course what I did today had absolutely nothing to do with the actual operational performance of the 58 and 858 (or SKS, for that matter). Maybe all the things that I thought were undesirable on the 858 make it an absolutely fantastic performing firearm. And maybe that fact by itself makes everything about it suddenly become beautiful. After all, it is a firearm, not a beauty-pageant contestant.
Anyway, the reason I've written this is that the sales clerk told me that the VZ-58 is indeed available in a non-restricted, non-chrome version, but, if it's like its short-barrel brother, it's going to be an expensive bugger. (He has none in stock, but he'll have a quote and availability for me tomorrow, so I don't know how steep the price actually will be.)
So, before I plunk down a few hundred more on a VZ than I would on the CZ, I need to get some input from owners of the non-restricted SA VZ-58.
As far as looks goes, you already know which I prefer. (The NR VZ also comes standard with a comfortable pistol grip, forearm, adjustable-length plastic stock and, if it's like its short-barrel brother, a rail on the left side of the receiver that can be the base for an optical sight. I suppose these features account for some of the difference in price between the VZ and CZ.)
What I really need to know is whether VZ-58 performs as well as the 858 in the field. If it does, I'd be willing to spend the extra bucks just to have what to me is a much better looking firearm that I'll admire every time I pick it up or clean it. If it's got problems that the 858 does not have, I'm a very practical person, so I'll drop it like a hot potato(e). (And just how I'd proceed after that, I really do not know.)
Thanks for any advice.
)
