CZ 600 Trail - Interesting Details!

I think that the biggest take-aways from this thread are the fact that we are receiving European rifles with an M15 Muzzle Thread Pitch and NO RECALL. This means that our version of the Trail is still set up as a switch-Barrel/Calibre system, perfect for a Barrel swap to .300 Blk, or......
 
Bartok5 said:
I think that the biggest take-aways from this thread are the fact that we are receiving European rifles with an M15 Muzzle Thread Pitch and NO RECALL. This means that our version of the Trail is still set up as a switch-Barrel/Calibre system, perfect for a Barrel swap to .300 Blk, or......
Click to expand...

I beg to differ on "swap barrels". Original 600 never had red glue. You can argue that screws are not welded down, but there is no doubt in my mind that CZ officially will not support change barrels and deny any warranty or responsibility if you unscrew a barrel.
 
owlowl said:
I beg to differ on "swap barrels". Original 600 never had red glue. You can argue that screws are not welded down, but there is no doubt in my mind that CZ officially will not support change barrels and deny any warranty or responsibility if you unscrew a barrel.
Click to expand...

I could care less about Warrranty support. I made that decision when I elected to purchase a CZ 600 Trail, as .223 was never my intended final calibre for this carbine. It has been my intention all along to "restore" switch-barrel capability and so I am very pleased to discover that the "Recall" (if there actually WAS a European-recall) consists of nothing more than a "witness" dab of red lacquer on each of the two Barrel Retention Bolts. There is no "glue" as you suggest, just a dab of paint which flakes off when the Barrel Retention Bolts are loosened.

In any case, I agree 100% that the Red paint is a "warning" of sorts from corporate, liability-minded CZ HQ not to mess with the Barrel Retention Bolts for warranty purposes. I also agree that CZ will most likely NOT support the CZ 600 line with stand-alone calibre-change Barrels or Barrels matched with corresponding Bolt-Heads. I have no doubt that CZ will deny Warranty service on a rifle with cracked or missing Red Lacquer on the Barrel Retention Bolts. With all of that said, I could not honestly care less about CZ Warranty service. If there is a market for switch-barrels in Europe, then the aftermarket will step in to provide them. Otherwise, there is no shortage of machining-centric firearms companies here in Canada such as Dlask, Herron Arms, ATRS, Tactical Ordnance, RDSC, etc that are capable of spinning up stand-alone calibre-change Barrels for the CZ 600 series at a reasonable cost.

i am totally down for a .17.5" Barrel in .300 Blk. The only question now is who gets my money to spin up that Barrel with its integral locking lugs. I will begin to investigate this process this coming week and will report back who I end up going with.
 
Last edited:
I agree. For me, barrel removal just allows for easy cleaning and storage. Whether or not CZ offers replacement barrels remains to be seen. Even if they are only offered to Smith's, it would be a very low cost job to replace a barrel and bolt head. I can see alot of future barrel and bolt head trading.
 
The Kurgan said:
I agree. For me, barrel removal just allows for easy cleaning and storage. Whether or not CZ offers replacement barrels remains to be seen. Even if they are only offered to Smith's, it would be a very low cost job to replace a barrel and bolt head. I can see alot of future barrel and bolt head trading.
Click to expand...

Exactly - Switch-calibre capability was always the intent, from the initital stages of the CZ 600's design....
 
They also still advertise the switch barrel feature.

"Easy change of calibers
The original design of the CZ 600 centerfire rifle series allows for easy disassembly of the barrel, as well as the simple conversion to a different caliber that‘s compatible with the given receiver."
 
Doubtful anyone in Canada is going to make barrel extensions, you’ll be forced to cut up your barrel. CZ won’t sell you bolt heads either, magazines another issue. Just look at sauer 200/202
 
m1008 said:
Doubtful anyone in Canada is going to make barrel extensions, you’ll be forced to cut up your barrel. CZ won’t sell you bolt heads either, magazines another issue. Just look at sauer 200/202
Click to expand...

If that's the case, and I guess we'll see, there could be an active EE "WTT" for barrels and bolt heads.
 
Wolverine carries 202 barrels and I have definitely seen m03 barrels in Canada

I don’t think anyone is going to be super enthusiastic about machining replacements from blanks though. Might ask Bob Jury though; he seems to like a challenge. He told me he did a few non standard semi auto barrels.

Will probably cost a lot though.


With CZ advertising that they will be producing replacement barrels to be fitted by “qualified armourers” my only concern would be if the 600 doesn’t take off.
 
The Trail and Alpha will likely take off, which may spurn sales of other models. I will break down after a scheduled surgery and pick up a 300 WM. I have enough standard calibres anyway.
 
Wolverine hasn’t had 202, (same with bolts or other parts) barrels in years, I’d say only the r8 has been successful and has good availability on barrels and other parts. Every other switch barrel system has been a failure, why would the cz600 be any different. I wonder if the receivers will suffer from cracking like the alum version of the sauer 202
 
All euro designed switch barrels failed because of one main reason - they have no market volume and no one can create a shared standard like armalight or rem 700 did to bring wide audience. They come to a market usually at a very high price, with very limited availability, very proprietary, uncertain advantages but overhyped as high priced products are. As a result, the is too little demand for anyone else to step up and make anything for these switch barrel systems. So even at a premium market these switch systems cannot offer neither variety, nor quality, nor actual performance advantage compared to custom built. And they are usually European makes which a totally screwed perception of what a rifle should ( nein! nein! god forbid it is not a weapon!)

For instance:

  • Mauser 66, came out, mechanical marvel at the time, could not sell, totally forgotten. Curious collectible.
  • Blaser 93, compact, light, fast, innovative. Well, blew up a few faces here and there. Was ALL proprietary parts
  • Mauser M03, same people did more traditional (lets not blew up bolts into customer faces) approach. Mechanically - awesome. Could not sell beyond high end in Europe. Nothing fits from anything.
  • Blaser R8, slightly better, did not blow that many faces. Unreasonable prices, unreasonable availability, every single part is proprietary. After all this years some aftermarket, but does not share anything with anyone
  • Sauer 200, 202, trying to avoid M03 and R93/R8 barrel attachment, yet again, everything proprietary, everything not like the others. Could not make steel receiver and aluminum was never strong enough. High end euro nobility.
  • Strasser guy, gets kicked out of Blaser, proceeds doing exactly the same all proprietary thing with way less success
  • Steyr, sitting in a typical euro fashion idle till the train already left the station. Comes up with monobloc, at 6k, good luck.
  • Beretta BRX1, "build on a dare not to use any existing patents"

While anyone can do a savage small shank with a nut. Everyone makes rem 700 footprint stocks. AICS mags fit everything.
 
Last edited:
That's hilarious. And, probably all true. I have to say, the CZ 600 is different. As with all CZ's, metal work will likely be impeccable, initial cost to purchase is relatively low, and it could possibly become the Ruger 10/22 of the centerfire world if the aftermarket steps up. Let's see how sales do. Currently, I'm sure sales are dismal, but that could change once more Trails and x39 Alpha's show up
 
You think mauser m03 and blasers have worse metal work than CZ? It’s a gun brand not a cult. Handle one and get back to us

CZ have always been working guns, well made but ugly as sin. Partially true of BRNO too. I like them just fine but they aren’t top tier by any stretch of the imagination

Blasers are very popular; just not with plebs like us. All the blaser guys I know make your devotion to CZ look like a casual relationship
 
m1008 said:
Doubtful anyone in Canada is going to make barrel extensions, you’ll be forced to cut up your barrel. CZ won’t sell you bolt heads either, magazines another issue. Just look at sauer 200/202
Click to expand...

We shall see - that's what investigation is all about in the coming days and weeks. Hopefully someone will have the necessary machining skills to produce a Barrel with three integral Locking Lugs. Worst case, I would sacrifice my .223 Barrel to create a Barrel Extension of sorts with the locking lugs for the replacement .300 Blk Barrel. Same .223 Bolt Face, cartridge case, magazine, etc. All that changes for a swap to .300 Blk is the calibre. It ought to be quite simple, really....
 
Bartok5 said:
The Trail Receiver is flat-bottom, constructed of alloy with 2 Barrel Retaining Bolts - one long, and one short, both the same thread-pitch. There was no thread-locker used on the Bolts - just some red lacquer on the Bolt Heads. The Torque spec is engraved on the Receiver itself - 5 Nm / 44"lbs - which actually seems scary tight on alloy threads, but whatever.... There is no apparent marking on the Barrel, Receiver or in the manual to indicate a specific order for tightening the Barrel Bolts. The manual does state that the Stock (Action) Screws are to be tightened beginning with the Rear (Trigger Guard) Bolt, but nothing about the Barrel Bolts themselves:

20230217-232926.jpg
Click to expand...

Curious that the receivers on the 600 trail appear different than the Alpha (aside from the obvious differences in the piccitinny rail):

IMG_0122 by M J, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom