Why So Many CZ 452/455s on the EE?

Definitely they could be an anomaly because two rifles is not enough to make general comments on the overall quality of a make. What is possible is that people that get a good one are happy and contribute to the good reputation of CZ rifles and those that get one that is not up to par or their expectations end up selling it.
When reading up about them on different forums I came across some very unhappy owners and many that had to be returned for flawed parts and gunsmithing. It is like two different worlds. I had a CZ 75 in 40 Smith and Wesson that was my IPSC handgun. It had a carbon fiber guide rod and a custom single action trigger and it was really good, best handgun I have owned.
 
As I wrote earlier in this thread , I bought a CZ 457 MTR in .17 HMR 2 years ago , loved it so much that
I ordered another MTR in .22 .

After a couple range days with both I proceeded to advertize my CZ 455 Canadian , CZ 455 Evolution
and my CZ 455 Varmint , not because they were less accurate or less in quality but because I knew that
I would probably not/ never shoot them much/ever again.

I also shoot another couple rifles that are of good quality & accuracy that I won't be selling soon , my
Cooper LVT & Montana Varminter.
 
Update on my CZ 527 in 223, after quite a bit of work sand paper and a fine stone the rifle is smooth and working well. And I like it so much I am keeping it and selling a Ruger 1B. I find the smaller size and light weight very appealing and can see why they are popular. What is a concern to me is that a rifle that was very difficult to operate would ever leave the factory. That may explain the large number of rimfire and centerfire CZs for sale.


I wouldn't think so as what you are implying is that a lot of them are leaving the factory with operating issues. I hardly think that is the reason you are seeing CZ's for sale. I just bought 2 new CZ's and they are not a problem. As mentioned, there are a lot of varying reasons from some wanting better accuracy, some just don't like them, some are buying the newer model and some are selling just because it is that time of year. Also have to remember that over the last several years quite a few CZ's have been sold. So it is not really a surprise that you are now seeing a number of them on the market.
 
Last edited:
I'd be curious to know how many of the 452/455s on the EE were posted by people who recently picked up a 457 (or Tikka t1x for that matter).
The shorter bolt throw and better trigger in the 457 have certainly caused my 455 to collect more dust. If they were in the same caliber the 455 likely would have been sold.
 
I'd be curious to know how many of the 452/455s on the EE were posted by people who recently picked up a 457 (or Tikka t1x for that matter).
The shorter bolt throw and better trigger in the 457 have certainly caused my 455 to collect more dust. If they were in the same caliber the 455 likely would have been sold.

I think your spot on. I am new to the rimfire precision shooting, and have just completed a 457 build. At the time I started I was just learning of the 452/455 and then I discovered the 457 and some of the nice upgrades of the model. I decided to splurge and go for the 457. I think many perhaps upgraded to the 457, and are now selling off the previous rifle in the safe.

From what I gather the 452 and 455 are amazing rifles. No reason not to buy, probably a good time to acquire one actually.
 
Have to remember all companies have a motto. Cheaper, faster, more profit.

You are bang on MB, there is always a compromise in today’s world. Either they lower their production cost, reduce quality or charge more. I am not sure what’s steps CZ has taken to maintain quality? Perhaps source cheaper wood, perhaps reduce labor costs, or maybe pass the build costs onto the buyer so they can maintain their quality.

Older is not always better. But it is usually correct to say it was more affordable to offer a higher quality product for cheaper on days past. The new 457 comes in around $699, how does this compare to the new cost of a 452 or 457?

I should add, I have never owned a 452 or 457, although I have shot and handled a 455 on many occasions as my hunting partner has one for a grouse gun. I find quality equal personally.. but would have to hear what others think
 
But do CZ's shoot as well as so often suggested? Probably not. Some do shoot very well, but most are average CZ shooters that meet the CZ standard of 2 MOA groups at 50 yards. (According to posters on RFC who've sent their CZ to CZ USA because it's not shooting well enough, CZ USA tells them if it meets 2 MOA it's not defective.) For comparison, 2 MOA is 1" at 50 yards. That's not nearly as good as many might prefer.

While the vast majority of CZ barrels are of average CZ quality, the fact is that an average CZ barrel is not up to competing well against many more expensive alternatives. A 2 MOA standard is probably reasonable for a mass production rifle, but it's not what many CZ buyers expect or want. To be sure some CZ's produce very good accuracy, but the average one doesn't. From my own experience with about ten of them, not all CZ rimfire rifles shoot equally well or very well.

Even CZ rifles that do shoot well don't shoot well with just any ammo. It's necessary to use good match ammo to get really good results. A lot of newer shooters especially may not be prepared for the expense of match ammo to achieve good accuracy.

In the end, if a CZ rimfire rifle is purchased for target shooting, it may be a little disappointing to many shooters. The result is that they do not keep them.

I disagree. I have bought CZ rifles over the years and all 5 shot lights out (three 452's, 512, 455) once I found the correct ammo. I was disappointed in my last 452 Varmint in 22LR as it didn't shoot CCI standard under 1 MOA but it definitely shoots SK and various others under half MOA when I do my part. (SK flat nose match OMG!).

Even my 512 is an MOA shooter with CCI standard velocity when I can manipulate that dang trigger..

The
 
I disagree.

With what do you disagree? That the CZ standard of 2 MOA means a CZ is not defective? That the vast majority of CZ barrels are average for CZ barrels? That it's necessary to use really good ammo to achieve really good results?

I said "if a CZ rimfire rifle is purchased for target shooting, it may be a little disappointing to many shooters. The result is that they do not keep them." Here's why.

The only CZ bolt action .22LR with a written guarantee of accuracy are the 457 models with the CZ "match" chamber, which are the MTR and LRP rifles in .22LR.

CZ itself says "Selected models in the .22 LR calibre, such as the CZ 457 MTR, have a Match cartridge chamber at the very edge of the CIP tolerance. Very precise production and low tolerances provide an excellent accuracy guarantee of 1 MOA depending on the ammunition used."
See h t tps://www.czub.cz/en/firearms-and-products-family/cz-457#:~:text=Selected%20models%20in%20the%20.,depending%20on%20the%20ammunition%20used

To be sure, there are CZ's in all models that do even better than 1 MOA for the match chambered models, or 2 MOA for for the other bolt action models in .22LR, but it all depends on a particular rifle having an exceptionally good CZ factory barrel. But the average barrel, the one most likely to be on any rifle, is the one most shooters will have. A few unlucky CZ buyers will have a poorer-than-average barrel.

But without good ammo that suits the barrel well, consistent accuracy will be elusive. This holds for all rifles. Even better rifles/barrels aren't going to regularly shoot inexpensive ammo well. While it's usually much better than high velocity bulk ammo, CCI SV is not an especially good ammo. Take a look at the 1/2" challenge where the vast majority of successful entries have used ammo that's typically much better than CCI SV. While an ostensibly "better" ammo like SK Standard Plus is a step up from CCI and usually produces superior results, it is not sufficiently consistent to reliably meet CZ's accuracy guarantee of 1 MOA for the MTR and LRP rifles.

If MOA accuracy is the reasonable standard of accuracy here, some CZ bolt action .22LR rifles meet it. But it's not a sure thing. Take a look at how many factory CZ rifles have qualified for the 1/2" challenge. While merely suggestive and not conclusive or scientific, for a brand that sells very well and is in the hands of many shooters, they aren't represented in significant numbers. Of the approximately 200 successful entries in total, there are about 30 stock CZ's without match chambers, about three with factory match chambers, and an additional eight or so custom CZ rifles with aftermarket barrels.

The average CZ doesn't make a consistent 1/2" shooter "all day". It's important to keep in mind that this is neither supported nor refuted by the experience of a single or a small number of CZ rifles. It is characteristic of the average CZ rifle. Of course, with enough attempts, a few very small groups are possible with almost any decent rifle. But target shooters want consistency, results that are repeatable, not the result of chance. That's why I said that in the end, if a CZ rimfire rifle is purchased for target shooting, it may be a little disappointing to many shooters. The result is that they do not keep them.
 
I got a borescope a few months ago, and had a look at a few of my rifle bores.
The CZ 452 was among the worst, lots of tooling marks including a few scratches completely around the inner circumference of the barrel.
Also, the leade was NOT pretty, with smeared edges on the lands from a dull reamer.

I'm surprised it shoots as well as it does. It regularly turns in groups under a half inch at 50 yards.

I can't shoot well enough to string 5 together very often, and I can't be bothered with the 50 yd challenge anyway.

The bore in my T1x is slightly rough compared to a lapped custom barrel, but it's head and shoulders better than the CZ.

The entire Tikka rifle is much better finished than the CZ, with the exception of the Tupperware OEM stock. I had to remove a few burrs from the inside of the action on the CZ when it was new, and it's been polished where appropriate, including the bore.

So, why am I keeping the CZ?

It's a classic design, with nice wood and blued steel, very little plastic.
And despite a less than stellar barrel, it still shoots very well, certainly better than I'm capable of.
The action has smoothed out over a few years, the trigger remains decent (though still noticeably worse than the Tikka) with a slight bit of creep.
And I just like the rifle. It's enjoyable to shoot, looks good, and has put me in the winner's circle at competitions a few times in the time I've owned it.
Would I buy another one? Maybe.
 
I bought a 452 varmint barrel in .22 last year , it has killed dozens of rodents . This week I bought the same in 17HMR.
The CZ 452 reminds me of a XR250 Honda, sure there are nicer ones, but it does what I need it to do very well. I take mine to the Gun Smith and get them tweaked , YO Dave etc.
 
True, but 10/22’s are pretty overpriced and underwhelming in terms of accuracy and features. Those CZ’s generally shoot very well right out of the box.
 
Sometimes ignorance is bliss.;)

There's some truth in this. There are frequent reports of rifles with bores that don't look especially good that nevertheless shoot well. I've borescoped a number of CZ rifles, and many of them looked very, very nice. But that doesn't necessarily translate to good shooting because what can be seen with a borescope is only a small part of the accuracy equation. Among the accuracy-related factors that borescopes can't reveal are bore diameter consistency throughout the length of the barrel and chamber/bore concentricity.
 
There's some truth in this. There are frequent reports of rifles with bores that don't look especially good that nevertheless shoot well. I've borescoped a number of CZ rifles, and many of them looked very, very nice. But that doesn't necessarily translate to good shooting because what can be seen with a borescope is only a small part of the accuracy equation. Among the accuracy-related factors that borescopes can't reveal are bore diameter consistency throughout the length of the barrel and chamber/bore concentricity.

Indeed. My Weatherby XXII bore was constricted by 0.002" (measured by slugging) just a few inches ahead of the chamber. While the entire bore looked visually pristine, accuracy was not satisfactory. This rifle was made by Anschütz. Every little detail matter in rimfire.
 
Back
Top Bottom