not sure yet, on its way
CZ 600 thoughts?
- Thread starter owlowl
- Start date
not sure yet, on its way
The vendor sent me a wooden 527 instead of synthetic due to inventory error on their side, but I'm fine with that anyways. A synthetic ranger would be nice to have but I haven't seen any with iron sights in stock.. Also ordered a NECG ghost ring for that 527, I really liked the 557 one.
I had been lurking the 557 American in 6.5 CM for a while and then saw the announcement of the 600. I ended up pre-ordering the Lux in 308, mainly because my target rifle is in 308 also and hunting ammo is very easy to find. I don’t mind the nitride finish given it’s more permissive to bad weather. All the other features are quite nice also! Lots of people here complaining that it is not « old school » enough, but it’s not like there are no used old rifles on the market?
Anyway, I’m hoping to use it for hunting in situations where the Winchester 94 could be too stretched. Otherwise I’m sure it will be fun to do some plinking cycling this 60 degrees throw!
I also have a CZ 455 varmint and CZ Drake shotgun and have grown to enjoy CZ good quality for the price and little quirks!
Anyway, I’m hoping to use it for hunting in situations where the Winchester 94 could be too stretched. Otherwise I’m sure it will be fun to do some plinking cycling this 60 degrees throw!
I also have a CZ 455 varmint and CZ Drake shotgun and have grown to enjoy CZ good quality for the price and little quirks!
I think we can all agree, than 557 was worse than 550. I also think that the market is very rich with both older production "classic" rifles and custom build expensive offerings. Such that I think that CZ should by all means move forward and try something better or even just new. This is the only way to evolve a product to something better.
CZ 600 as I see it right now has a lot of downsides - stocks are junk, I'm not sure how barrel screws will work, especially with aluminum receiver and so on. But, I think there are a lot of POTENTIALLY good things. From CRF or version of thereof, to passive ejector, double column feed magazine, to most importantly (for me) unification of parts. Because this leads to more options from both OEM to aftermarket offerings.
We'll see, I'm optimistic. Especially if you consider that CZ now owns Colt and Diemaco and can potentially become our significant domestic manufacturer.
CZ 600 as I see it right now has a lot of downsides - stocks are junk, I'm not sure how barrel screws will work, especially with aluminum receiver and so on. But, I think there are a lot of POTENTIALLY good things. From CRF or version of thereof, to passive ejector, double column feed magazine, to most importantly (for me) unification of parts. Because this leads to more options from both OEM to aftermarket offerings.
We'll see, I'm optimistic. Especially if you consider that CZ now owns Colt and Diemaco and can potentially become our significant domestic manufacturer.
- Location
- Steel Town
Don't agree at all. The 557 is more refined, smoother metal finish, tighter tolerances, and more accurate. I have/had plenty CRF, and I prefer the simplicity and feel of a push feed. My last two 550's, while nice, both required some break-in time, and were just not as accurate as my two 557's. Furthermore, after owning three Brno model 21's, the 550 just paled in comparison. The only reason why the 557 didn't make a splash was that it was cheaper to produce, which is true. Some automatically equated that with a poor product. And, no surprise when looking at the junk being sold today. However, this is an example of where cost cutting did not result in an inferior product, quite the contrary. The same can be said for the Tikka T3 and Remington 700--both with a loyal following. CZ dropped the line after a short while because they found even more cost cutting options with the 600 and at the same time win some fanboys with a few new gimmicks. It also became apparent to them that CRF is associated with CZ, and no sense competing with the push feed junk being sold by the competition. While I look forward to a 600 in my stable, it will not replace my nicely blued 557's that shoot well and look great. My guess is that 557's will soon be very coveted, as everyone races to the bottom.
Last edited:
- Location
- Steel Town
Cost cutting to compete with the junk being offered for less money. The 600 seems to show that they can offer CRF, decent finishing and some novel features and keep prices competitive--though we will soon see.
I think they became very costly to produce with way too many versions offered
Blastattack
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Winnipeg MB
Not sure why you would say that. A cursory glance at the 557 and 600 series reveals that the 557 employs much more expensive manufacturing techniques than the 600 series does. The bolt and receiver mating (the lug raceways) is an expensive process, whereas the 600 is a simple round hole. Any thread adds cost, and the 600 eliminates two expensive threading operations in favor of 2-3 cheap threading operations and another precision fit hole. Easy to make, measure and keep consistent. The multi-lug, barrel-integrated locking system is a more expensive manufacturing feature, but still far cheaper and simpler than the full length lug raceways. By utilizing a “barrel extension” system, they can make the receivers out of “lesser” materials that don’t require special heat treating, and they can avoid the risks associated with heat treating expensive machined components. All I see are manufacturing upsides, and as a result upsides for the consumer.
Well, you have a 557 line setup, making a new 600 production line is a significant cost. Yeah, they can probably save with 600 but I kinda doubt that these savings are that significant. They probably didn't get much out of the 557 investment to begin with.
It appears to me that the major driver for CZ is not costs but market situation. Most of the big manufacturers moved a decade of so ago to make very cheap push feeds. They are roughly all the same, in that time Winchester had to move it all to Portugal, Remington went bankrupt two times or so, Bergara appeared and flooded the market with essentially basic conventional push feed to a decent price/value. Tikka is holding up its own part of the pie, same as Howa.
On the EU front, they are all goings nuts with barrel change multicaliber. Look at pathetic Berreta BRX1 release. CZ probably wants to have an offering which is different from a conventional plain push feed. And they made that to the same cost that 557 was.
PS
By all means I agree that 600 is not expensive, on itself. But I'm talking about overall costs of a model switch for CZ.
It appears to me that the major driver for CZ is not costs but market situation. Most of the big manufacturers moved a decade of so ago to make very cheap push feeds. They are roughly all the same, in that time Winchester had to move it all to Portugal, Remington went bankrupt two times or so, Bergara appeared and flooded the market with essentially basic conventional push feed to a decent price/value. Tikka is holding up its own part of the pie, same as Howa.
On the EU front, they are all goings nuts with barrel change multicaliber. Look at pathetic Berreta BRX1 release. CZ probably wants to have an offering which is different from a conventional plain push feed. And they made that to the same cost that 557 was.
PS
By all means I agree that 600 is not expensive, on itself. But I'm talking about overall costs of a model switch for CZ.
- Location
- Steel Town
...and the same can be said about the overall start-up costs for the 557! It is always lower production costs and strategic marketing that motivates a manufacturer to change lines. Let's be clear, the model 600 (and I am pre-ordering an Alpha) is a significant efficiency operation for CZ or they wouldn't have dropped the best value push feed on the market. However, just as with the excellent 557, let's hope this new line does not translate into a lower quality product. Knowing CZ, it will likely be another very good product--albeit tailored to appeal to a new generation of shooters.
For those who have not shot a 557, you really need to try one. Nicer than Tikka's T3x model that seems to own the push feed market. First out the gate marketing and a quality product at a decent price point is clearly key!
For those who have not shot a 557, you really need to try one. Nicer than Tikka's T3x model that seems to own the push feed market. First out the gate marketing and a quality product at a decent price point is clearly key!
Tikka has an edge over 557 because it has been longer without change and aftermarket is better for Tikka. Stocks being the main thing. Tikka in MDT XRS or KRG bravo is significantly better than any factory 557.
Ok, I take that back, there is XRS for 557, never mind.
Ok, I take that back, there is XRS for 557, never mind.
Last edited:
I am the new generation of buyers. Got a pal 3 years ago. And the 600 line has zero appeal for me. It looks cheap. And I have zero need to change its barrels, what a useless feature for a center fire.
- Location
- Steel Town
Yes. And, people came to expect CZ to always manufacturer CRF at a reasonable price. Reality is that it costs too much to manufacture this day and age, which in turn, would have have put CZ into another price segment.
The 557 is a real gem, and CZ's walnut stocks are just beautiful. Too bad about timing and established quality (Tikka, Howa) competition and the plethora of poor quality, cheaper priced competition.
Im an old school old guy and Im with you, the 600 has zero appeal to me and I just love my old school CZ557's and 527's
Brutus
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The biggest issue I foresee with multi calibers is per unit cost. If you have deep pockets it's not an issue.
In Europe a rifle with two other switch barrels is often less bureaucracy. Attractive for them so they are willing to shoulder the higher cost versus a North American hunter with less restrictions on number of long guns ownership.
In Europe a rifle with two other switch barrels is often less bureaucracy. Attractive for them so they are willing to shoulder the higher cost versus a North American hunter with less restrictions on number of long guns ownership.
