Expectations of zastava m85 in 7.62x39

H

heronfish

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
64   0   0
For those that already own these guns, I wonder what I can expect from one I just purchased from Corwin arms.
I have a set of lee dies, a Redoing neck sizer and prvi brass and hornady v max on the way.
Should I expect the same performance as any other out of the box rifle or more in line to an sks as per accuracy?
 
I never owned one in this caliber or any of newer models.
Heard lots of bad info about M85 and also about 22mags and 22LR and about rimfire from guys who went through couple and had same problems over again.
Even here on CGN i see few times someone writing about them.did not spent too much time reading but flip little thru old threads and might find some more info about it
 
I bought the full stock and scoped it. The 3 range trips, one with irons shooting Barnaul, two scoped with Horn 123 SST/Norma200/CCI LR have convinced me that this gun badly needs bedding.
 
Haven't owned one but have been researching the M85 and the CZ 527 in x39.

Hands down I'm going to spend the bit extra and get the CZ. I don't want to be unfair to the M85 because I haven't handled one but after reading everything I can find on the two the CZ gives me a hell of a lot more confidence.

If the M85 doesn't give you groups at least half or better than an SKS something is wrong.
 
Mine has been meh so far. About 3" groups with S&B soft point at 100m. Won't really chamber or extract lacquered steel surplus very well, copper washed and zinc plated may be better but I don't have any of that to try.
The action is terrible, rough, sloppy, binding.....just sad. I didn't want to load for this rifle but ended up with dies and will try out some loads Sunday hopefully. It's not high quality by any means, and definitely will need to be free floated and bedded.
 
I recall with the AIA 7.62x39 bolt action model, people had extraction problems as well with the cheap lacquered ammo. The consensus was that with the chamber hot, the lacquer melts and the shell expands on firing and pretty much glues itself in there.

In a semi action like the SKS, it's quickly extracted out of there, but on a bolt action, there it sticks.


Hitzy said:
Mine has been meh so far. About 3" groups with S&B soft point at 100m. Won't really chamber or extract lacquered steel surplus very well, copper washed and zinc plated may be better but I don't have any of that to try.
The action is terrible, rough, sloppy, binding.....just sad. I didn't want to load for this rifle but ended up with dies and will try out some loads Sunday hopefully. It's not high quality by any means, and definitely will need to be free floated and bedded.
Click to expand...
 
Yup. Laquered ammo is best left for gas operated firearms IMO. In a manually cycled action like my AIA the copper wash surplus is the stuff to run.
 
I've fired almost 4,000 rounds of lacquered 7.62x39 rounds in my Rem 700 test gun and never had any case stick.

IMG_7014.jpg
 
The M85 could be a good gun....
They need to ditch the "mauser" concept as there is nothing mauser about it at all, except maybe the ejector box. Simplify production, make it a round receiver, standard 2 lug bolt with REM/WIN style cocking piece/housing, with REM style ejector pin, Sako type extractor, keep the trigger as it's passable. It would be easier to make, and would make the action smoother and tighter.
As it is now though, it's not good...
 
Well here's to hoping that mine is good out of the box! I don't see a lot of them on the EE so I gather they must not be completely horrid.
 
The only Zastava rifle I've fired was a 9.3X62, which proved to be very accurate, had a very good trigger, and cycled reliably, but I didn't care for the hideous roll-over cheek piece of that particular model. Calibre magazine recently did a SXS comparison of the Zastava M-85 with the CZ 527, both rifles chambered for 7.62X39. They said that the Zastava was finished nicer, attention was paid to potential sharp edges, and the hinged floorplate made it nicer to carry at the balance than the CZ, but that's where the praise seemed to end. I was a little surprised that despite Zastava's description of the action as a mini-Mauser and Mauserish bolt appearance, the extractor is sort of a SAKO hybrid, and not CRF, although the ejector is fixed and not a plunger. The finishing of the bolt was described as rough, cycling the action was rough, the magazine spring broke, (which should probably be written off as a anomaly, and the rear sight was described as canted. Accuracy was described as a mixed bag with 2"-2.5" groups from factory and surplus ammo. I wouldn't put much stock in this if you're a handloader, the handloader's tighter tolerances and better components shows a rifle's true accuracy potential. If it was me I'd choose the CZ 527, not due the Caliber's write up, but because I've owned numerous Brno and CZ rifles, and I've come to appreciate them.
 
Boomer said:
The only Zastava rifle I've fired was a 9.3X62, which proved to be very accurate, had a very good trigger, and cycled reliably, but I didn't care for the hideous roll-over cheek piece of that particular model. Calibre magazine recently did a SXS comparison of the Zastava M-85 with the CZ 527, both rifles chambered for 7.62X39. They said that the Zastava was finished nicer, attention was paid to potential sharp edges, and the hinged floorplate made it nicer to carry at the balance than the CZ, but that's where the praise seemed to end. I was a little surprised that despite Zastava's description of the action as a mini-Mauser and Mauserish bolt appearance, the extractor is sort of a SAKO hybrid, and not CRF, although the ejector is fixed and not a plunger. The finishing of the bolt was described as rough, cycling the action was rough, the magazine spring broke, (which should probably be written off as a anomaly, and the rear sight was described as canted. Accuracy was described as a mixed bag with 2"-2.5" groups from factory and surplus ammo. I wouldn't put much stock in this if you're a handloader, the handloader's tighter tolerances and better components shows a rifle's true accuracy potential. If it was me I'd choose the CZ 527, not due the Caliber's write up, but because I've owned numerous Brno and CZ rifles, and I've come to appreciate them.
Click to expand...

One of the site sponsors sold one at a blow out price as this was an issue.
Broken mag follower spring.
I called around looking for one, but they seem to be a bit of a rarititty.
Not to say one cannot be sourced from another wee shooter and fabbed to fit?
 
Semi - related but didn't the Jap Arisakas get converted by the VC to 7.62x39 .Mauser type action........Harold
 
I read that the Remington 700 BDL spring will work and actually allows the the magazine to go to the full stated capacity. So far I am pretty mixed on my Zastava M85 - I tried to sight my rifle in yesterday while out gopher shooting but I wasn't able to because the Magwedge Rail's screws stripped out (the rail seems pretty good but the screws are just plain lame). I also had to drill out the rail holes slightly to even mount the rail to the rifle as the screws were a tad too big for the rail. That being said I can't really blame Zastava for the QC on the Magwedge Rail. I am reserving my final thoughts on the Zastava until I have actually shot some groups with it.

Observations to date:

1.) M85's stated mag capacity is not even close - it is not a 5+1 but more like a 4+1 and I find that loading the fourth round to be a PITA. Not a big deal for me as I don't really care about mag caps but somebody expecting a the full 5+1 may not be happy.

2.) The barrelled action on my rifle is outstanding. For this price point I would say that they do an excellent job. I had over 5 CZ527s at various times and I found that their bluing is pretty thin compared to the Zastava. Frequently, I would find that wiping down a 527 after it had sat in the safe would have a reddish brown colour on stain on the rags. I wasn't too impressed that they would mildly rust like that. The adjustable trigger is pretty good and while it is more complicated than a Remington 700 trigger (all four screws play a role in the geometry of the sear engagement) it can be adjusted to a relatively low poundage (~3 lbs) with no creep or overtravel.

3.) The inletting on the Zastava and the general woodwork is not great on the M85 - while not awful, there is issues with the inlet which leads to point four.

4.) Binding of the action - I heard about this complaint and after spending about 5 hours going over the M85, I noticed that the stock needs to have a lot of minor relief work to get a better fit of the action to the stock. While the M85 is pillar bedded (huge surprise to see this), I don't think the pillars were properly measured and are a one size fits none. Typically on a good stock/action fit, the action screws should go from loose to tight in about one and half turns. On my M85, the screws would start torquing tight almost 4 turns before it bottoms out. When I removed the action from the stock, the bolt moves freely but inside the stock, you can actually bend the action enough that it causes mild binding (i.e. the bolt only moves freely when it is operated in a specific back and forth motion). As well, if also torqued too tightly, the safety won't operate easily which indicates that the action is being pulled to one side and binding against the stock.

5.) The finish on the stock is not great but not as horrid as I have read about. I added two coats of Tru-gun oil to seal up my stock and I think it looks much better but the factory finish was pretty functional.

In general, I would describe this rifle as a tinkerer's dream. There is a great deal of quality (i.e. good components) but the fit is not great. Out of the box, the rifle functioned but if you have little to no experience in minor gunsmithing, this would not be a recommended rifle. At this price point, you can get some pretty functional Savage/Stevens/Ruger rifles that would do the job and be less of a PITA. If you are somebody who enjoys tinkering, this rifle seems like a good deal. All of the expensive to do stuff(i.e. bluing) is done properly but the final fit needs to be tweaked. If I can get this rifle to shoot well with surplus (<1.5 MOA) than I would consider this to be a great deal.
 
I noticed with mine most of the barrel us free floated except at the chamber end it makes a lot of contact. Definitely some work to do on it. Just got an Elite 3500 2-7x32 that suits this rifle pretty good.
 
I agree Glock4ever, it's a tinker's gun.

The one I got from CanAm had an over indexed barrel with the sights leaning to the left looking down the gun. It seems to have some accuracy potential but I did have some issues on the first range trip. The bolt was not cocking properly at times and this resulted in one accidental shot down range when the gun fired as the bolt closed. The cocking issue cleared itself but I've been told the bolts should be stripped and detail cleaned of any gunk.
This gun needs to be beded and have the barrel channel adjusted to allow the barrel to float freely. The action has some play fore and aft and the front lug has cracked out the small amount of wood behind it which will need to be repaired.
The magazine floorplate on mine is severely misshaped and if it is swung all the way open it digs into the stock on one side.
Work I plan on doing,
Strip and clean the bolt.
Bed the stock, float the barrel and and repair the blown out piece.
Grind and file then cold blue the magazine floorplate.
And lastly re-index the barrel.



CanAm was easy to deal with and would have happily replaced the gun but we worked out a partial credit since I'm OK with doing the work needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom