Kimber Varmint vs CZ 452Varmint

I

imarco

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Has any body had experience with these two rimfire rifles and if so can you compare the quality and accuracy? is the Kimber worth the extra $$$?
 
I bought a CZ lux a couple of weekends ago, wnt out to sight it in with a POS Tasco 3-9 rimfire scope. The first group of 5 were all touching at 50 yd, adjusted the scope to point of impact and the next group of 5 were also all touching. The groups could have been covered with a quarter. This was usig CCI Mini-Mags. My hunting buddy was so impressed he is getting rid of his 10/22 and getting a CZ.
 
I've owned rifles from both companies, a BRNO 2E (same as CZ452 with a different name) and a Kimber Classic.

The BRNO was excellent value for the price. From the bench and using ammo it liked the BRNO frequently outshot Rugers, Remingtons, Marlins and Brownings. Mine had a fairly creepy trigger but a decent gunsmith could clean it up with no problem.

The Kimber was a handsome rifle. Even though I had some issues with the rifle it was certainly superior to the CZ which is not surprising at the price. Mine had a good (not great) trigger pull and was accurate enough although not breathtakingly so.

If I were in the market for a mid-range .22 repeater I would buy a CZ without hestitation over any of its nearest priced competitors. No question.

If my wallet was bulging and I had the price of a Kimber Classic to spend I'd first check the Sako Quad, see what was in the ballpark from Anschutz or save a little more and track down a Cooper Arms.
 
When all is done, there will be four models of the .22 rifle. The Classic, Super America, SVT (Short Varmint/Target) and HS (Hunter Silhouette). The SVT is a special case, but the other three are mechanically alike and differ only in the quality or style of wood and the finish.

The Classic has a plain walnut stock checkered 18 lpi. The 22" barrel tapers to a 1/2" diameter at the muzzle. The HS has a high-comb, Monte Carlo stock, a 24" barrel and matte finish.

Judging from pre-production samples, these rifles will be gorgeous. The stocks are AAA claro walnut, checkered 22 lpi and accented with an ebony forend tip. Metal is highly polished blue, but the mechanical stuff is all the same.

Same But Different

The SVT rifle uses the same action, but all the other features are different. The barrel is an 18" fluted stainless steel tube with the now-standard match diameter of 0.920". The stock is a gray laminate. It has a very high comb and a pistol grip that strongly favors right-handed shooters.

We recently had a chance to compare the SVT and the Classic version of these Kimber rifles. Our test procedure was pretty simple. Each rifle was tested with the same ammo: three match, three standard velocity and three high velocity loads. The rifles were dressed out with scopes appropriate for their use. The Classic wore a 4.5-x10x Leupold Vari-x III; the SVT a Leupold 6.5-20x target scope. All benchrest shooting was done with the scope set at the highest possible magnification.

There were no mechanical malfunctions although we did have one balky magazine that wouldn't always feed the first cartridge. Kimber replaced it.

Kimber has earned an enviable reputation for good triggers on their pistols and the tradition continues here. The fully adjustable trigger on both rifles was set just a hair over 2 lbs. with a nice, crisp letoff. We didn't feel the need to change it, and really don't like triggers much lighter on this type of rifle.

Kimber .22s have always been renowned for their accuracy and always came with a neat little laminated test group. The standard was -- and is -- that no rifle will be shipped unless it can shoot at least 0.4" five-shot groups at 50 yards. The test ammo is Federal Gold Medal Ultra Match. Our Classic came with a group that measures 0.263". The SVT's was a stunning 0.120".
Click to expand...

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_1_47/ai_67717289/pg_4
 
I own a Kimber SVT with the magazine (Older ones were single shot I believe). With a single shot adapter it's fairly decent. With the magazine and soft target ammo you have to be carefull. With mine it will scrape the top of the next round when you bring the bolt back to eject the previous round. I like the stock, the trigger, and the fit/finish. That being said it's accuracy while being very good isn't exceptional (Considering the price it should be exceptional). I have a Leupold EFR 6.5-20x on it. I'll be trying some other ammo. I found the first 3 shots with Lapua Super club were in the same hole at 25 yards. The 4th always opened up the group. The fifth being inbetween. I'll be trying some Elley later on. The usual cheaper ammo culprits shot OK but nothing spectacular.

I also have a Walther KKM single shot. It came with a a cheap Contender 4-16x scope with fake AO (It didn't actually work, parrallex was always present). At 30 yards it was outshooting my Kimber using Lapua Super club (forgot to include the bench to mat length when setting out the distance of the target :redface: Hence 30 yards). The Walther is being scoped with the same scope as the Kimber. Right now the second hand Walther is my favourite. The trigger is very good and there is a button for a set trigger like set up (hard to explain). The stock on mine is some sort of custom walnut thumbhole with a nice wide bench rest style forend. It fits me like a glove but clearly isn't the original. Still it's perfect :D. Works on a bench and is still very handy for off hand. Plus it looks really good.
 
Last edited:
heavenIsAlie said:
why not compare the kimber to the 453?
Click to expand...

The Kimber was around 1K when you could get it. Although the CZ from everything I've heard is a very good shooter for half the price. I believe the accuracy of the Kimber and CZ rifles is fairly comparable. The fit/finish is pretty much the main difference.

I don't own a CZ 452 or CZ 453 so I can't really compare the two.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom