Wow.... that is nice wood.... mine is nowhere near that.... cz would struggle to match that.... but that is an anomally.... I have two zastavas technically.... on3 in 22 and a rem 799 which is a zastava action in a boyds stock.... will be looking to get the 22 mag and 17 hmr to have the smallbore set....
Zastava verses Ruger American?
- Thread starter kamlooky
- Start date
Wow.... that is nice wood.... mine is nowhere near that.... cz would struggle to match that.... but that is an anomally.... I have two zastavas technically.... on3 in 22 and a rem 799 which is a zastava action in a boyds stock.... will be looking to get the 22 mag and 17 hmr to have the smallbore set....
Dunno Archie..........doncha git all tired looking at them stripes?
Not a horrible distrackshun?
And those protrudie thangs up ontop the bawrrel?
How muchie to put you owt yer misery?
Dang it, that's a nice piece of work.
Actually they repair Zastava in Toronto. The importer has someone come in to do repairs when needed. Or so they told me.
Scott...
I bought 2 ruger firearms in 2012 and both needed warranty work right from the start. Don`t think much of USA quality, workmanship. I own 5 Zastava firearms and they just work well, shoot very strait and are beautiful. Did a 350yd running shot on coyote with .223 couple winters back.
I have zero experience with either rifle, and while I'm no fan of 10/22s, I can see some merit in the new Ruger American. Reminds me of their 77/22 (which is a nice rifle) only with a crappie-ish plastic stock. I'm at odds with wood-stocked guns right now, since I'm inclined to baby them. Synthetic isn't as pleasing, but I find I spend more time using them and less time worrying about dents and dings. I'm simmering over the idea of adding another .22WMR to the collection and am considering the Zastava and the RAR. Accuracy reports on the RAR in .22WMR are excellent, and for a hunting gun...I like the synthetic and compact size. Would be nice to see one of these discussions not end-up having "one is crap, one is amazing" outcome since I suspect these new RARs are well-received for a reason. The sense I get is that the Zastava's really are superbly priced for the quality you're getting, but does that make the Ruger a crappy gun?
To answer the question... no.... but if you can get time tested and proven quality with wood and deep blue or synthetic new kid on the block in synthetic with decent press what would you choose?....
Wood. All day. Every day.
But that's me. I understand, from a technical standpoint, why polymer is a better choice - Less subject to slight warping in different temperatures, humidity. Easier to maintain. Lighter (or, at least if it's good quality polymer it's lighter, cheap polymer can weight more). More durable. etc. etc.
And I simply don't care. Guns should be blued steel and wood. Period. If I ever get around to bothering with an AR, I'll get wood furniture for it, too.
I agree with you on the wood.... stainless has its place for tough duty imop.... as for polymer I struggle with the amount of flex in these stocks and I hate the way ruger and salvage have made entry level rifles that look like they should be in a star wars movie..... but that is me.... I dont even like xbolts for same reason..... if you make a plastic stock why make it all funky looking?...
I get all that, and don't disagree. There is something attractive (to me) about a purpose-built, all-business synthetic-stocked rifle with a good reputation for accuracy. I like wood more, but don't DISlike a nice synthetic stock either. Granted, I'm in the wood business...and have to contend with it's strengths/shortcomings 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year. (going on 25 years) AND...while I don't think the RAR has a nice stock from a design POV, I actually don't like the lines of the Zastava either. Looks like it was drawn properly on a computer, then someone stretched one corner of the drawing.
Won't argue on the Savage synthetic stock though, they should be ashamed of themselves for still using those dreadful things.
Ahsan Ahmed
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Zastava finish quality is far superior compared to the Ruger American. Very accurate with irons. Comes with 2 steel mags. However, the slim pencil like bolt leaves a bit more to be desired. Handled a Ruger but never shot one. Only thing I liked on the American is the bolt compared to that on the Zastava.
- Location
- West Quebec
I'm always happy to have a lower cost option (Zastava) if it holds up quality wise it's great for shooters.
For some guns, wood just works better. I have a Marlin 782 in 22WMR that came with walnut and I would never, ever replace it.
That said, guns are not furniture. They should be made of plastic and steel (for now, until we come up with a replacement for steel) such that one could be left leaning against a tree for a year and still be perfectly functional.
Materials tech not being up to the task yet, I prefer synthetic stocks over wood any day for the durability factor, the aesthetic appeal, and the reduced maintenance requirements. In certain applications, synthetic will not work, however.
I have a Mini 14 Target model, and the laminate stock it shipped with is part of the secret of why it is so accurate (0.5 min or so). Synthetic just isn't that rigid. Were I to replace it, I suspect the rifle would suddenly not shoot anything like it does at present.
That being said, I prefer plastic to wood, since wood is so variable.
- Location
- Brant County, Ontario
Very well built and beautiful wood on some of them!
