husqvarna versus Zastava

I've never had or even handled a Zastava so it would be hard for me to compare. My favorite bolt action is the Schultz & Larsen:),



closely followed by 'my' #2 choice, the Husqvarna:D.


:D
 
The Swedes or Zastavas are both Mauser designs. You definitely can't go wrong with either one, especially since you're looking at the 6.5x55mm round! Let us know what you decide on. Though, if you want something guaranteed accurate, get a CG63 rifle. Equipped with diopters, Shutz and Larsen barrels, custom and bedded stocks, these rifles are tack drivers designed specifically for target competitions. They are available from Trade Ex as well.
 
I own two Zastava's and two Husky 1600's... I like them both... The Husky is a tad more "refined" and the Zastava has a better trigger... On my rifles, you would be hard pressed to say which action is smoother... The Zastava's were very smooth and crisp right out of the box. For a nice rifle at a good price, they seem to take undue heat???
 
It always been like this - somekind of "hate" for the Zastava. Same goes for the Santa Barbara. Funny thig is that when they're branded Remington, Charles Daly (Mark X) or Parker-Hale, they're much better actions.... go figure.

Now, the main difference between the Zastava and the HVA 1640 serie is the action size. First, the HVA have a slightly shorter ejection port - bolt draw than what usually seen with N-A firearms. It was made to fit the '06 size, but that's it.
Then, the HVA 1640 are Small Ring actions, while the Zastava is a Large Ring one.
The HVA is a compound design of mixed M/94 and M/98, while the Zastava is a spinn-off of the FN Supreme.
Both have similar floor plate / trigger guard assembly, the early HVA have a milled all steel one while the late Zastava seems to be made of investment casting (steel alloy?).
The Zastava triggers are fully adjustable while most HVA have a single stage Mauser type one, but some have the vintage Tradewinds / Timney adjustable trigger already installed.

Wood quality and finish usually is better on a HVA than a Zastava, but they also had utility grade with cheaper wood.
All in all, it's either you get a rugged reliable and very well made but used HVA or you have a brand new utilitarian Zastava.

If you want to know morw about the Zastava, make a search for the thread I started called post-Remington.
 
Thank you, Baribal .. for infusing some common sense into this discussion.

Basically, there is nothing wrong with either rifle. They are more similar than different.
Me, I have always loved Husky's. But recently I almost bought a new Zastava full-stock rifle.
Why didn't I? Because I was offered a mint Sako for the same price. .. *shrugs*
 
There is a ton of info in this forum regarding the Zastavas for anyone interested. I've owned Husqvarna 1600 series rifles and currently own several Zastavas and based on my experience with them they are both super reliable and well made rifles. Both are based on excellent and proven designs and made with high quality materials. The finish on the Zastava rifles isn't as nice as on the Husqvarnas but they are generally just as accurate and just as reliable. Below is a link to my stainless Zastava if anyone is interested in this version.

Personally I think the Zastava rifls are underrated, especially the stainless ones.

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/939361-Zastava-stainless-7x64-Brenneke
 
I don't have the knowledge to compare the two, but I have been shooting my recently acquired Husqvarna 9.3x62 a lot recently and am very impressed att the fit, finish and accuracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom