Cz 457 first impressions
- Thread starter themachinist
- Start date
I heard a lot of similar comments when the 455 was released, I for one bought a 455 and it shoots very well. I also took delivery on a 457 MTR this week that I have not yet shot, I'm waiting for my scope to arrive, I'll reserve judgment about this rifle until I get to take it to the range and see how it shoots, I'm not concerned about the changes as long as it shoots well because after all it is a rifle and accuracy is the main criteria
All this hullabuhloo about the barrel change system... That's not the concern. It's their barrel making/chambering/crowning. Any 45xx that has a good barrel, will shoot well. Those that have "dud" barrels, do not shoot well. All I ever see is "well, I don't like the 455 barrel system", but nobody can demonstrate that there is an actual difference in performance. What's so bad about how it's engineered, anyway? Why isn't anyone ripping on the Tikka T1X barrel attachment? That's just 3 grub screws cranked into the barrel shank, and there isn't even a flat milled onto the shank for the screws! Besides... for the average quality of the barrels coming out of these factory production facilities, whatever very minor difference the barrel attachment might make, is not perceivable. In other words, most of the barrels aren't good enough for the method of attachment to amount to a hill of beans.
If the barrels are good, the 455's and 457's will shoot under 1/2" at 50 yards reliably, barrel attachment method notwithstanding. As hunting/sporting arms, what more do you want from them? You want a .22 that shoots under 1/4" all day? Go build a full custom on a Stiller 2500X action, chase ammo lots, and enjoy that precious "threaded to the receiver" barrel
Most Anschütz and Walther rifles aren't threaded to the receiver, heck, who does still thread?
I won't defend CZ for the crappy barrel workmanship I've seen personally in a number of 455's, and reports of the same in 457's I see on RFC. It's pretty sad that I can cut a better crown in my garage with the Manson crowning tool than CZ can on a lathe... there's no excuse for that. A little more QC attention on the barrels, and there'd really be little to complain about. Sadly, it seems that CZ is just letting the barrel quality slide. I've got a safe full of .22's that meet all my needs, actually just sold one that wasn't seeing much use. 457's just don't offer me anything my other rifles can't do. I'll say the same for any other rifle, I'm just not in the market to buy. Wouldn't mind trying a few, but I'm not buying just to do that.
If the barrels are good, the 455's and 457's will shoot under 1/2" at 50 yards reliably, barrel attachment method notwithstanding. As hunting/sporting arms, what more do you want from them? You want a .22 that shoots under 1/4" all day? Go build a full custom on a Stiller 2500X action, chase ammo lots, and enjoy that precious "threaded to the receiver" barrel
Most Anschütz and Walther rifles aren't threaded to the receiver, heck, who does still thread?I won't defend CZ for the crappy barrel workmanship I've seen personally in a number of 455's, and reports of the same in 457's I see on RFC. It's pretty sad that I can cut a better crown in my garage with the Manson crowning tool than CZ can on a lathe... there's no excuse for that. A little more QC attention on the barrels, and there'd really be little to complain about. Sadly, it seems that CZ is just letting the barrel quality slide. I've got a safe full of .22's that meet all my needs, actually just sold one that wasn't seeing much use. 457's just don't offer me anything my other rifles can't do. I'll say the same for any other rifle, I'm just not in the market to buy. Wouldn't mind trying a few, but I'm not buying just to do that.
All this hullabuhloo about the barrel change system... That's not the concern. It's their barrel making/chambering/crowning. Any 45xx that has a good barrel, will shoot well. Those that have "dud" barrels, do not shoot well. All I ever see is "well, I don't like the 455 barrel system", but nobody can demonstrate that there is an actual difference in performance. What's so bad about how it's engineered, anyway? Why isn't anyone ripping on the Tikka T1X barrel attachment? That's just 3 grub screws cranked into the barrel shank, and there isn't even a flat milled onto the shank for the screws! Besides... for the average quality of the barrels coming out of these factory production facilities, whatever very minor difference the barrel attachment might make, is not perceivable. In other words, most of the barrels aren't good enough for the method of attachment to amount to a hill of beans.
If the barrels are good, the 455's and 457's will shoot under 1/2" at 50 yards reliably, barrel attachment method notwithstanding. As hunting/sporting arms, what more do you want from them? You want a .22 that shoots under 1/4" all day? Go build a full custom on a Stiller 2500X action, chase ammo lots, and enjoy that precious "threaded to the receiver" barrel
I won't defend CZ for the crappy barrel workmanship I've seen personally in a number of 455's, and reports of the same in 457's I see on RFC. It's pretty sad that I can cut a better crown in my garage with the Manson crowning tool than CZ can on a lathe... there's no excuse for that. A little more QC attention on the barrels, and there'd really be little to complain about. Sadly, it seems that CZ is just letting the barrel quality slide. I've got a safe full of .22's that meet all my needs, actually just sold one that wasn't seeing much use. 457's just don't offer me anything my other rifles can't do. I'll say the same for any other rifle, I'm just not in the market to buy. Wouldn't mind trying a few, but I'm not buying just to do that.
I don't disagree with any of that really, but my question for you would be this~if there were 2 CZ 457s being offered to you, same price/workmanship/wood etc....but one had it's barrel threaded into the receiver, the other held on with grub screws..which would you pick?
In spite of my username, I only have a few 22s that I shoot allot...and am not in the market for anything new. I could be tempted...and am MOST likely to be tempted by a CZ. I love the look of the 457s, and I'd be setting aside money for one were it not for the barrel issue. (something I consider to be an issue, not speaking for anyone else) We all have our own sensibilities.
We've already determined that there are 455's that shoot very well, some not so much, based on that I would take the 457 that shot the better of the two, regardless of how the barrel was mounted, but that's me, other manufacturers have moved away from threading barrels including Anschutz and get very good results, hopefully my 457 will be one of the better ones, CZ guarantees 1/2 moa on the 457 MTR, I would be very happy with that
I have two 455s. a .17 and a Military Trainer. Both are great shooters; I have about 500 rounds through each, and the actions are not broken in. I have been winning competitions with the trainer and stock open sights and the .17; dime size or less at 100 yards from a bench rest. What more can I ask. Both are great shooters, and the Bavarian stock on the Trainer fits me better than any other rifle I have ever had. I hoped the 457 really took off so I could grab up a shorter barrel 455 Lux to throw a scope on.
I see what you're doing, baiting me into giving you the answer that agrees with your sensibilities. If accuracy was equal, I'd take the prettier wood, but oh, wood is the same too you propose. Well, for what I would do with a 457 if I ever bought one, I'd take the grub screw barrel. Why? Because first thing I'd be doing is tying up my tomatoes to the factory barrel and calling up Benchmark for a custom blank. Cheaper and easier to fit the barrel on the non-threaded version, and Loctite 680 is an excellent way to affix a barrel.
In another scenario, I already have a 455 that I'll swap .22LR and .17HMR barrels in, so I don't really need another rifle offering this capability. In that case, I'd take the threaded version since it'll remain a one-caliber rifle for it's time with me anyway. A "grub-screw" rifle doesn't add value to me, truth be told I don't swap barrels that often anyway. Might be different if I lived somewhere I could pop out into the backyard and plink, with a gopher patch nearby too for using the .17, but I don't. So, if it's all the same, might as well have the threaded one. What if I had to pay full price for the threaded version, but was offered the grub-screw rifle for 30% off? I'd definitely go with the discounted rifle, as I don't see the threading as having any real advantage to justify paying full pop. I'm fine with either system, it's not a sticking point to me, there are other factors that I am looking at to base my decision.
Will you be able to tell the difference after shooting both?
I landed a 16" MTR yesterday and quickly patched it out and ran the lyman bore scope into it. The chamber/throat is flawless. The bore is pristine and lacking the 'rings' I've seen reported on RFC. The crown is clean and even. There is no torque in the bedding, however I'm going to skim bed it and fix the recoil lug into the stock. I got to shoot it at 50 yards today in -10 temps with a 35kph wind and after about a dozen rounds down the clean barrel I fired off two five shot groups. The first was .46", all horizontal. The second was 4 into .3", one of the shots went wide due to my bipod and ice doing things. By this time the windchill had taken it's toll on me. I didn't need to shoot anymore, it can only get better based on these initial results. I'll wait for a lot less windchill and throw the carpet on the bench next time.
Hey don't get me wrong, I have a 457 and put it onto the 1/2 inch challenge in the first 50 rounds of ammo, only modification was to the factory trigger, but I did swap the 17 barrel for a .22 barrel designed for the 455
The qualified guys in the shop got pulled to the side to fulfill the contract when Walther got CZ to build their rifles for them using the CZ 452 receiver, the apprentice was left in charge of making barrels for the 455 as the journeyman was busy fitting hammer forged russian barrels to the 452's that were released with walthers name on the side in laminate 3 position stocks, not available in north america, well rare as hen's teeth anyways, it was Walther's design that called for the sides of the action to be slabbed off, and for the tang to be cut, heck if it was good enough for Walther for almost 20 years, it's going to be great for us now
The qualified guys in the shop got pulled to the side to fulfill the contract when Walther got CZ to build their rifles for them using the CZ 452 receiver, the apprentice was left in charge of making barrels for the 455 as the journeyman was busy fitting hammer forged russian barrels to the 452's that were released with walthers name on the side in laminate 3 position stocks, not available in north america, well rare as hen's teeth anyways, it was Walther's design that called for the sides of the action to be slabbed off, and for the tang to be cut, heck if it was good enough for Walther for almost 20 years, it's going to be great for us now
You hit it on the head! Just dont understand how the 457 qualifies as a PRS rifle why the hell did t they focus on what builds an actual PRS rifle.
CZ stood for something at one time now they follow under the scammers code sell product not precision.
Sooo many things wrong with this MTR I bought the pill now I need a cure I’m just about there.
I’ll post my results just wished I could send pics on a I pad.
CZ stood for something at one time now they follow under the scammers code sell product not precision.
Sooo many things wrong with this MTR I bought the pill now I need a cure I’m just about there.
I’ll post my results just wished I could send pics on a I pad.
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
Still looking for that rifle, it is proving elusive...
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
ok, 2 it is.....
I'm an engineer, and there is usually a trade-off; in this case, I'm not seeing one. Inserts in die-sets and molds are held in with bolts and sometimes "grub-screws"; these run hundreds of thousands of cycles; in the case of some of our tools, over 1,000,000 cycles before wearing out Once or twice a year over close to 100 tools we might see something come lose. The barrel on a rim-fire has a lot easier life than my 550 Tonne Injection Molding Presses, and easier yet than our metal forming, punching and stamping presses do.
How is an AR 15 or modern sporter barrel attached? How are most modern military and machine-gun barrels attached? Barrel tenon fits in receiver mortise; held on with a single nut... built to MIL spec GD&T tolerances (not had fit).
What is the difference?
If something did happen to your barrel (unlikely), it will be a lot less cost effective 20 years down the road to change that threaded barrel than a tenon barrel.
Because of some laws in some countries that limit the number of firearms (the liberals would like to do that here too) and the fact that one gun does not do all things well, the design intent was to have one platform that was easily convertible to other calibers. The present design of the 455/457 achieved this intent very well indeed. The CZ rifles surpass everything else in their price range (although I see some of the pricing on some of the 457 models; and they are getting up there). For most the 455 is an expensive rim fire, but in reality, it is a mid-priced rifle; the same way that a Lincoln is a mid priced car compared to a Kia and a Rolls-Royce.
The Walther KK 100 was an attempt to produce an entry level rifle, an effort that was shelved by about 2005. It used a CZ receiver and a Russian made barrel. The receiver had a trigger that was not used on CZ rifles, but otherwise it appears to be unchanged save for the Walther name on it.
Below are some pictures of the KK 100
Very interesting, grauhanen. I was almost thinking YoDavey was being sarcastic, but I now recall having seen those photos before. I suppose even back in CZ's heyday Walther didn't consider their barrels to be up to their standards, although the receiver was. That should be some serious food for thought for those who place inappropriately elevated importance on the receiver design. At what point in a rifle's construction/design towards ultimate accuracy does the action actually become the limiting factor? What does the ultra-engineered custom action actually deliver towards the accuracy goal? All rhetorical questions, of course. I'll just post a reminder that I've got a Cooey 750 and a Remington 597 shooting 0.2's and 0.3's on average at 50 yards, and have a look at the actions on those two. Plus, that is with un-tuned sporter profile barrels. It costs a lot of money and requires extreme manufacturing precision to improve rimfire accuracy beyond that, for what amounts to little actual gain.
Good to hear, Steve. When was the rifle manufactured? I'm wondering if there is any correlation to issues being spotted in the early 2018 rifles, and the fresh ones coming out alright?
Good to hear, Steve. When was the rifle manufactured? I'm wondering if there is any correlation to issues being spotted in the early 2018 rifles, and the fresh ones coming out alright?
^hey Rabid~I'm not trying to "bait" you into anything, the question is very simple..as is the point I was trying to make. You'll also not find a single post I've ever made on the topic where I said I had first-hand experience with 455s/457s. lol So yeah..not saying they're NOT good/great guns, but I do firmly believe they're inferior to the way 452/453-series guns were made. Not bad, just not as good. That's where the question came from, for everyone claiming it doesn't matter~which would you pick, given the choice? Don't need the answer that bad, wasn't trying to start an argument.
As for the way CZ attaches barrels since the 455s surfaced~I have faith in the method, not allot of faith that CZ takes enough care executing it consistently. I'll stay out of these sorts of conversations going forward, as I see a growing divide in the rimfire forum. Those who buy the best factory guns they can afford and just use them..maybe minor tweaks like trigger work, and those who see expensive, factory guns that aren't shooting well as a challenge...and will go to extreme lengths to get them shooting the way they should have from the factory. I fall into the first category, and don't have the budget to buy a $500-$900 fixer-upper.
Last edited:
lol, I love this.........the 452/455 debate is akin to the anshutz 54/64 debate, end of the day they usually both shoot when you take the time to find the right ammunition.
I can attest that the way CZ hangs the barrel has no effect on accuracy, I bought a 20.5 inch sporter barrel for a 455 and mounted it on my 457 before even taking it to the range, got it into the challenge tread on the first box of 50 rounds of ammo. so receiver? or barrel? well hey I'll tell you what, I can go shoot 10 groups and measure them for a benchmark, then put that barrel on a 455 receiver and run the same test and we can all have the answer.....
The Walther K 100 had 2 trigger options, the factory CZ single stage trigger, and a more expensive option with the Walther 4 link 2 stage trigger, what they didn't tell the world is that Walther made their trigger to fit the receiver with no alterations.....why they never offered that trigger as a stand alone part available in north america is the mystery, that would have been a smart business venture if they had of
I can attest that the way CZ hangs the barrel has no effect on accuracy, I bought a 20.5 inch sporter barrel for a 455 and mounted it on my 457 before even taking it to the range, got it into the challenge tread on the first box of 50 rounds of ammo. so receiver? or barrel? well hey I'll tell you what, I can go shoot 10 groups and measure them for a benchmark, then put that barrel on a 455 receiver and run the same test and we can all have the answer.....
The Walther K 100 had 2 trigger options, the factory CZ single stage trigger, and a more expensive option with the Walther 4 link 2 stage trigger, what they didn't tell the world is that Walther made their trigger to fit the receiver with no alterations.....why they never offered that trigger as a stand alone part available in north america is the mystery, that would have been a smart business venture if they had of
