Decide my next rimfire: CZ 452 vs Savage MK II-F
- Thread starter satcom
- Start date
easyrider604
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Greater Vancouver, BC
I voted for the CZ.
When I did a comparo and shot my MkII-F and CZ Varmint side by side, on the same day, same cheap Winchester Dynapoint bulk ammo while sandbag rested at 100 meters, the CZ Varmint delivered a best group of about 1.25 inches, while the MkII-F gave about 1.625 inches.
One good day, the MkII-F shot a one inch group, but I didn't have the Varmint along so cannot really compare the two. Never been able to duplicate that 1 inch group with the MkII-F. Fit, design and finish of CZs beat Savage as well.
Of course, other people may have different experience.
When I did a comparo and shot my MkII-F and CZ Varmint side by side, on the same day, same cheap Winchester Dynapoint bulk ammo while sandbag rested at 100 meters, the CZ Varmint delivered a best group of about 1.25 inches, while the MkII-F gave about 1.625 inches.
One good day, the MkII-F shot a one inch group, but I didn't have the Varmint along so cannot really compare the two. Never been able to duplicate that 1 inch group with the MkII-F. Fit, design and finish of CZs beat Savage as well.
Of course, other people may have different experience.
Also having shot both, the CZ was hands down more accurate. The Savage rifles I had were a Mark II-LV and then a Mark II_FV. I have since sold both and still have my 452 Varmint. Niether of my Savages had accutriggers, but I shimmed them to have excellent triggers. The CZ with a Brooks kit is still better.
The Savages were more ammo tolerant, the CZ has a specific diet.
The Savages were more ammo tolerant, the CZ has a specific diet.
CZ, no question
There's nothing wrong with savages, in partcular the heavy barrel versions are very accurate. But they use hard wood stocks and have more stamped metal parts.
However, you're getting a noticeably better gun in the CZ. If you have the extra money and don't want the thumbhole stock Savage version, get the CZ. You can save a little buy watching equipment exchange.
After a while, I forget (or at least don't care) about how much it cost, and think more about how much I like it. That goes double for good scopes.
There's nothing wrong with savages, in partcular the heavy barrel versions are very accurate. But they use hard wood stocks and have more stamped metal parts.
However, you're getting a noticeably better gun in the CZ. If you have the extra money and don't want the thumbhole stock Savage version, get the CZ. You can save a little buy watching equipment exchange.
After a while, I forget (or at least don't care) about how much it cost, and think more about how much I like it. That goes double for good scopes.
Go with the heavy barrel Savage use the extra money to get decent glass for it!
I have two Savages one is a stainless savage HB in 22 mag the other is not HB or stainless and is 17hmr, both shoot fine! If you are just plinking and small game hunting it will more then do the job! and do it well. I don't care too much about looks, I do prefer the synthetic, its light, and easy to maintain.
I have two Savages one is a stainless savage HB in 22 mag the other is not HB or stainless and is 17hmr, both shoot fine! If you are just plinking and small game hunting it will more then do the job! and do it well. I don't care too much about looks, I do prefer the synthetic, its light, and easy to maintain.
Last edited:
- Location
- Pile of Bones, SK
Cz.
My light barreled CZ452 American may not shoot as tight a group as a heavy barrel rifle (It will shoot around 0.6" 5 shot groups at 50 yards with AE ammo), but the difference is of no consequence out in the field, and the lighter weight is certainly appreciated. Something to think about if you intend to shoot off hand rather than just off a rest. Even if you could put them all through the same hole with some uber accurate heavy barrel rifle, what's the difference when you are shooting at gophers, grouse or rabbits?
Get the CZ 452. savage can only dream of the quality of the CZ.I have both and the savage is not even close to the same quality.CZ factory lapped barrel.and an actual locking lug on the bolt.nice fit and finish and nice wood.
+1, the CZ exudes quality.
I vote for the CZ, hands down, and I've owned both.
The Savage will likely shoot decently (though some do, some don't), but it is an inexpensive little rifle, and it shows. That doesn't mean it's a bad rifle -- it just makes it a rifle with a different target audience. I would suggest that if you want an inexpensive little rifle to haul around under the seat of your truck to use on grouse/rabbits/other roadside pests, or if you don't have much money but need a gun, or if your measure of a gun is "do I enjoy making it go bang", then it's probably the go-to gun. But "fine firearm" it's not, and will never be. Mine (purchased brand new) was showing more wear and tear than I would like after about 5,000 rounds and 3 years chasing rabbits and grouse.
The CZ is a different kind of gun. It's within a whisker of being in the same league as rimfires costing north of the $1,000 mark. To put mine up for an example, I own a Silhouette model which I bought from an actual silhouette shooter who had run many (many) thousands of rounds through it. I have continued the tradition of shooting it often, and shooting it a lot, including taking it hunting on a regular basis, and by now this gun has seen so many rounds that if it were possible to shoot the barrel out of a 22LR, this one must surely be getting close. It still shoots 1/2 inch groups at 50 meters, and to judge it by it's fit/feel/appearance after all that use (and infrequent cleaning, I might add), it's still in better shape than my old Savage MKII was after 3 years/5,000 rounds.
Or to use a car analogy -- the Savage is like a Geo Metro - inexpensive, gets you around, even kind of fun for the first few years if you get the convertible model. The CZ is like a Toyota - in a whole other league of engineering excellence than the Geo, and if you treat it right, you'll put 400,000kms on it, and still think it's the best thing you ever bought, even though it cost twice as much as the Geo.
Edit: I may be showing my age, I'm not sure if Geo even still sells cars these days... ???
IMHO, my $0.02, YMMV, etc...
The Savage will likely shoot decently (though some do, some don't), but it is an inexpensive little rifle, and it shows. That doesn't mean it's a bad rifle -- it just makes it a rifle with a different target audience. I would suggest that if you want an inexpensive little rifle to haul around under the seat of your truck to use on grouse/rabbits/other roadside pests, or if you don't have much money but need a gun, or if your measure of a gun is "do I enjoy making it go bang", then it's probably the go-to gun. But "fine firearm" it's not, and will never be. Mine (purchased brand new) was showing more wear and tear than I would like after about 5,000 rounds and 3 years chasing rabbits and grouse.
The CZ is a different kind of gun. It's within a whisker of being in the same league as rimfires costing north of the $1,000 mark. To put mine up for an example, I own a Silhouette model which I bought from an actual silhouette shooter who had run many (many) thousands of rounds through it. I have continued the tradition of shooting it often, and shooting it a lot, including taking it hunting on a regular basis, and by now this gun has seen so many rounds that if it were possible to shoot the barrel out of a 22LR, this one must surely be getting close. It still shoots 1/2 inch groups at 50 meters, and to judge it by it's fit/feel/appearance after all that use (and infrequent cleaning, I might add), it's still in better shape than my old Savage MKII was after 3 years/5,000 rounds.
Or to use a car analogy -- the Savage is like a Geo Metro - inexpensive, gets you around, even kind of fun for the first few years if you get the convertible model. The CZ is like a Toyota - in a whole other league of engineering excellence than the Geo, and if you treat it right, you'll put 400,000kms on it, and still think it's the best thing you ever bought, even though it cost twice as much as the Geo.
Edit: I may be showing my age, I'm not sure if Geo even still sells cars these days... ???
IMHO, my $0.02, YMMV, etc...
