I read about the new cz 457 in yodaves review. I also posted about the barrel. Dave mentioned that the barrel is the same on the 455 as the 457. So I am still trying to figure out if they are the same barrel. Why is the 455 less accurate than a 452? Being the same barrel as the 455 why is the accuracy back up again on the 457? What am i missing? For being the same barrel how are the guns so different in accuracy?
What am i missing? CZ .22 rimfires
- Thread starter alberta guy
- Start date
pillars in the stock and the nut behind the bolt are my only explanations this far........
how many people test both brands and lot numbers of ammo? I'll tell you what, we pull the barrel off that I put on the 457 and we run it on a 455 action, see if the results are close enough to the same.....
how many people test both brands and lot numbers of ammo? I'll tell you what, we pull the barrel off that I put on the 457 and we run it on a 455 action, see if the results are close enough to the same.....
I should clarify something, not sure if you missed it in my original post but the 457 ROYAL I purchased came to me as a 17HMR rifle, I bought a 22LR barrel kit from prophet river and installed it on the rifle before I even fired the first shot, so I am with you on this one, was it the action/stock or did Yodave just happen to get one kick ass barrel from one kick ass site sponsor???
Yes, i do recall that you had to get a barrel ordered in. I'm am just trying to understand why the accuracy is so different. I guess I will have to wait until more of these rifles are around to confirm what yours did for accuracy. Unless some one else can explain why they are different?
haven't seen to many accuracy reports, mostly just guys posting wanting to know who and when is going to have them available, that and a few results of a trigger that needs a helping hand, it's never going to go as light as the 452/455 however, or not that I think anyway, waiting to be proven wrong
It isn't... a 455 with a good barrel shoots like Yo Dave's 457. What seems to have happened, is that since the beginning of the 455 era, CZ quality control has declined. More frequently than occurred with 452s, 455 barrels had brutally cut crowns and/or crappy chambers from a dull reamer. Sometimes they change the tooling, and some good barrels are made. A few reports are coming in over at RFC, and people are having accuracy issues with the 457. They haven't figured out why yet, but ignition issues seem to be the prime suspect. One guy had his crown inspected and reports that it is brutal, needing to be redone. These barrels with machining flaws would shoot just as bad if they were installed on a 452.
If you buy a match grade barrel, your accuracy potential is the same whether you fit it to a 452 or a 455, it'd just cost more to fit it to the 452.
your all aware that the 457 is still using the same barrels off the 455 line, they are interchangeable thus leading me to believe that there was no new tooling sought out for the barrel making, the same 2 guys that were making the barrels still are, nothing was cherry picked for me, I was just the next guy at the front of the line buying the only barrel in stock.
My 455 heavy fluted 22 barrel and 17 HMR varmint barrel are both tack drivers in my 455 thumbhole. This is with some guy from the internet trigger spring upgrade.
I bought a T1x in 22LR that is showing very good potential but have not had a lot of rounds through it > 20 yards indoors. Waiting for it to warm up past 0 to run 7 or 8 kinds of ammo through it to 100.
Trigger is awesome, bolt throw is excellent. OEM stock sucks - for me, LOP is wrong, cheek weld no good (I now have mine in a T3x varmint stock and may change that down the road to a laminate from Boyds, etc).
The 457 looks great (love the CZ wood) except the laser engraving of the model on some of the stocks. The short throw short lift bolt (like the T1x) will be the biggest improvement over the 455 IMHO. Sounds like the trigger is pretty good out of the box. Same barrel, same barrel mount method.
Methinks you got a good barrel Dave.
I bought a T1x in 22LR that is showing very good potential but have not had a lot of rounds through it > 20 yards indoors. Waiting for it to warm up past 0 to run 7 or 8 kinds of ammo through it to 100.
Trigger is awesome, bolt throw is excellent. OEM stock sucks - for me, LOP is wrong, cheek weld no good (I now have mine in a T3x varmint stock and may change that down the road to a laminate from Boyds, etc).
The 457 looks great (love the CZ wood) except the laser engraving of the model on some of the stocks. The short throw short lift bolt (like the T1x) will be the biggest improvement over the 455 IMHO. Sounds like the trigger is pretty good out of the box. Same barrel, same barrel mount method.
Methinks you got a good barrel Dave.
Last edited:
Rabid makes very good observations. CZ barrel quality seems more hit or miss since the introduction of the 455's nearly a decade ago. Perhaps it reflects cost cutting. Some shooters insist their 455's shoot as good as any CZ 452, while others say theirs have not. I've had two 455's, neither of which shot as well as the 452's I've had (and that includes 453's, which have the same barrels as the 452's). It may be too early to give a considered conclusion on the 457, but it is certainly not clear that problems associated with 455's have been solved with the newer line.
The CZ 455 and 457 barrels attach the same way using the same system. That means they are interchangeable, but they are not all identical. Some 457 models have different length barrels than their 455 counterparts. For example the CZ 455 American barrel is 20.5" while the 457 American is close to 24.5 inches long. The 457 Lux barrel is also longer than the 455 Lux. Perhaps other models may have exactly the same dimension barrels.
Try Frontier
I've been a fairly vocal proponent of the 452s OVER the 455s, but in the same breath...I usually confess that I've never owned or shot a 455. In my case, I've had nothing but great experiences with CZ452s (and a couple BRNO 2Es) so THAT, in concert with 455 issues I've read about here and RFC..leaves me only interested in pre-455-era guns. It matters to you as a shooter or it doesn't, but while 452s can still be had...I won't personally look at a CZ rimfire built after them. Shame too, as I find the new 457s to be really lovely-looking rifles.
I don't have, or care to have a large # of rimfires, but I do have a couple CZ452s, a varmint, and more recently...a 16" American, both 22s. Used to have a 452 Varmint in 17HMR and like a dummy...sold it. I also have a seldom-used BRNO 2E. Love all 3, they behave, and bullets go where they should without issue. In the event CZ goes back to building rifles the way my 452s were built, I'll be back to considering buying something new from them.
I don't have, or care to have a large # of rimfires, but I do have a couple CZ452s, a varmint, and more recently...a 16" American, both 22s. Used to have a 452 Varmint in 17HMR and like a dummy...sold it. I also have a seldom-used BRNO 2E. Love all 3, they behave, and bullets go where they should without issue. In the event CZ goes back to building rifles the way my 452s were built, I'll be back to considering buying something new from them.
I would have to agree with 22LRGUY in the fact that 452/453 models are a known quality and reliable firearm and I simply don't see any advantage for me to spend my money on the newer models until more is known through testing etc. From what is coming out on some of the forums many are disappointed.The supposed upgrades don't mean crap if it doesn't shoot.
Hit or miss... literally
Yeah, it is still too soon to judge the 457, it's still a very small sample group.Lengths and profiles may have changed, I think what YoDave was getting at is that the barrels are still coming out of the same hammer forging machine, and getting chambered/crowned on the same machines. No reason to believe that quality would swing one way or the other unless they've implemented QC checks at the critical chambering and crowning steps, and keep the associated cutting tools in better repair than they did during 455 production. Rick's report on RFC that his chamber is cut nearly as well as his Lilja bbl is encouraging, though the other fella's bad crown raises concern that nothing has changed in the QC department... We'll just have to see how things average out once more reports come in. I do think the CZ barrel blank has good accuracy potential in general, but the chambering/crowning will make or break it.
Yeah, I figured yodave would certainly be aware of that. I wanted to point out to other readers that some of the barrels were indeed different. Whether the barrels now being made are better than those over the last ten years or so remains to be seen. Certainly the biggest change with the 457 would be the receiver, bolt, and trigger.
After reading this thread and a few others regarding the new CZ rimfires, I must admit that I am left confused as well. From what I gathered, the series 455 and now 457 have eliminated the machined lug on the underside of the bolt, gone to a push in barrel rather than one threaded into the receiver, gone to plastic magazine wells, have potential accuracy issues depending on if you got lucky and got a good one or not, and people are still buying them over a time proven used 452 series?
CZ doesn't seem to have improved anything, they just cheapened the rifle by changing the design to one with a lot less machining work. I really like my 452 and older Brno's so I don't need a new CZ, but it saddens me to see what I consider the best rimfire rifle ever turn into just another entry level plinker.
CZ doesn't seem to have improved anything, they just cheapened the rifle by changing the design to one with a lot less machining work. I really like my 452 and older Brno's so I don't need a new CZ, but it saddens me to see what I consider the best rimfire rifle ever turn into just another entry level plinker.
I’m very happy with my 455 Lux, it’s shoots wonderfully. My overall impression is that most shoot very well and a few don’t. My biggest complaint is the lack of pillars to really facilitate proper tightening of the action screws without bending the floor plate.
Patrick
Patrick
