CZ 600 Alpha
- Thread starter Warren1
- Start date
I would not call 7.62x39 a large caliber.
But the reason ammo is inexpensive is because there is a lot of milsurp ammo available.
I've handled alpha in 223. It is not a bad rifle, but it depends on what you are looking for. There will be zero aftermarket, no magazines, no stocks. So you have to love it as it is.
It is more or less acceptable stock, plastic plastic, but not amazingly bad plastic. Trigger is fine. Bolt is not smooth and slick, but it cycles fine an ejects fine. Magazine is good, for a flush 5 round magazine that is. Kinda good actually, but nothing else will fit into alpha.
The only real issue I've seen on 223 (and should be the same in 7.62x39) is scope mounting. It has separate integrated rails, so you can only fit separate rings and these rings have to be in the same spots. However, due to the action length cut to the 223 (7.62x39), the overall length between the rings can be a problem and you won't be able to move scope forward to have appropriate eye relieve. Depending on your scope you might run out of space at the red arrow:
You might get around it with Trail instead of Alpha, but it is double price. You also might get significantly skinnier scope, this is 34mm tube. So in general, it can work if you like it. If you have any doubts in the whole package you should look at other options.
It is more or less acceptable stock, plastic plastic, but not amazingly bad plastic. Trigger is fine. Bolt is not smooth and slick, but it cycles fine an ejects fine. Magazine is good, for a flush 5 round magazine that is. Kinda good actually, but nothing else will fit into alpha.
The only real issue I've seen on 223 (and should be the same in 7.62x39) is scope mounting. It has separate integrated rails, so you can only fit separate rings and these rings have to be in the same spots. However, due to the action length cut to the 223 (7.62x39), the overall length between the rings can be a problem and you won't be able to move scope forward to have appropriate eye relieve. Depending on your scope you might run out of space at the red arrow:
You might get around it with Trail instead of Alpha, but it is double price. You also might get significantly skinnier scope, this is 34mm tube. So in general, it can work if you like it. If you have any doubts in the whole package you should look at other options.
Ruger Ranch or BCL Bison. You can buy the AR adapter for 7.62x39 from Gravel Agency to accept 10 round AR magazines. The BCL already accepts those in stock form.
The only thing the Bison has going for it is compatibility with some AR furniture and the excellent proprietary 20 round mags that they hit out of the park with.
However, I don't think they have released a 7.62 x 39 version of those mags yet; just .223/5.56.
Overall a great concept that BCL poorly executed unfortunately.
However, I don't think they have released a 7.62 x 39 version of those mags yet; just .223/5.56.
Overall a great concept that BCL poorly executed unfortunately.
TheBurnedMan
Member
- Location
- Nova Scotia
I was wondering about the CZ 600 Alpha in 7.62x39 as well. I can't seem to find much information on it like:
- How it compares to the Ruger American Ranch, the Howa M1500, Zastava LK M85 or even the stupidly expensive CZ 527?
- How does it handle surplus ammunition & how easy is it to clean after surplus?
- How it compares to the Ruger American Ranch, the Howa M1500, Zastava LK M85 or even the stupidly expensive CZ 527?
- How does it handle surplus ammunition & how easy is it to clean after surplus?
You can use 10 rounder magazines.
The Lux is heavier than the Alpha, but to me that was a good thing. It’s solid.
TheBurnedMan
Member
- Location
- Nova Scotia
I just wish the Alpha in 7.62x39 could use Bren 2 magazines like the Trail.
It has been my experience with the Bison that it does not feed well from AR/STANAG pattern mags, but runs flawlessly with its proprietary magazine - and that is in .223.
I can't imagine the dumpster fire it is with a STANAG / 7.62x39 combo.
I've owned both the 527 and the 600. Both were excellent shooters but definitely made for different purposes. The 527 felt lighter and more balanced to shooting from the shoulder, which makes sense given the slimmer barrel and wood stock countering it. The bolt took a bit of tweaking to get running properly; out of the box it was very sensitive to the direction you pushed the bolt back, sticking if you were off a bit. The bolt handle, even the later one, came quite close to your scope when cycling.
In contrast, the 600 had no issues out of the box. The bolt handle doesn't come close to the scope and cycles as smooth as butter. The trigger is just as crisp, albeit without the set trigger of the 527. I thought I would have an issue with the synthetic stock, but its quite nice - doesn't flex, feels solid. Same with the plastic magazine, which I thought would've sucked compared to the metal single stack of the 527. But so far no issues. Only complaint is how expensive extra mags are even when fully plastic.
Overall it feels like Cz cut corners over the 527 but at the same time fixed a lot of the short comings, so overall it's a good side-step. Given the cheap price, especially on sale, it's excellent for 7.62x39 plinking.
In contrast, the 600 had no issues out of the box. The bolt handle doesn't come close to the scope and cycles as smooth as butter. The trigger is just as crisp, albeit without the set trigger of the 527. I thought I would have an issue with the synthetic stock, but its quite nice - doesn't flex, feels solid. Same with the plastic magazine, which I thought would've sucked compared to the metal single stack of the 527. But so far no issues. Only complaint is how expensive extra mags are even when fully plastic.
Overall it feels like Cz cut corners over the 527 but at the same time fixed a lot of the short comings, so overall it's a good side-step. Given the cheap price, especially on sale, it's excellent for 7.62x39 plinking.
