Thread: CZ Stainless/ Sako finfire/Anschutz Or VQ

Starting to see a few CZ 455 stainless, arriving into Canada, my favorite gun-store, now has several in 22 mag,.17 HRM and .22,
I am heading down south, for a drive and a look tomorrow, for a higher end rimfire,
Hopefully can find a spot, to shot a few gophers(Richerson ground squirrels), there is still tons of snow about, and cold weather, spring is a month late at least. Might still be too cold, we will see.

I am up for a new rimfire, In .22 mag or .17 HRM, I've been a bit disappointed with my last two CZ rifles, the current .22 in 455 isn't overly accurate, and the last 527 in .221 doesn't feed very well, both are now gone/going.
Replaced the .22 with a Browning take-down SA-22, very impressed with it, getting as good groups, with it and irons, as I was getting with the CZ 455 .22 around 2" at 50m, not fussy either, the CZ sure was,
Looking into, a higher end magnum rimfire, so heading down south, to look at Sako Finfire II, Anschutz 1517, and Volqartsen, as well as the CZ stainless.
Anyone on here, got any higher end rimfires, whats your preference and why.

There's a thread about nice 22's somewhere. I'll link it if I can find it

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

I have an Anschutz 54.18 MS. I have done some reading before and after I got it.

The most important thing I learned around this time is that all quality brands can be very accurate, but higher quality brands/lines have better consistency of accurate rifles. CZ455 is at the bottom of consistency. Many people are lucky enough to get an accurate 455, many people are not and end up with a 2 inch 50m group ( or worse) example. Anschutz 64 action (which 1517 is) is definitely a class (or two) above in terms of consistency. Less people complaining about A64 than CZ455 being in accurate. But there still are such instances. Anschutz 54 appears to be near perfect. I have yet to see anyone complaining that their A54 is inaccurate.

But you are asking for 17mhr or 22mag, the position there I think is slightly different to 22LR.

For starters I would not buy 22mag. I go with 17hmr, and if I wanted a bit more power I would get 22 hornet or 223.

Apparently even many relatively cheap 17hmr rifles are fairly accurate, and the high end brands are not significantly more accurate. This is because 17hmr is so inherently accurate at about 100m the difference in accuracy between rifles do not show to any significant degree. by the time you reach a distance where the difference may show, you are out of usable range for 17hmr anyway.

So as far as 17hmr goes, I do not think there is a point going high end. A lot of people with Savage seems to get very good accuracy.

I have a CS455 17hmr, pretty accurate, much better than the same gun with 22LR barrel which I also have.

I own a CZ455 Stainless. It is very nice indeed shoots about an inch to an inch an half at 107m (my local range) with cci hp subs and similar with standard however not as consistently. Trigger is light but has so much creep it is effectively a 2 stage with two defined bits of travel (a predictable slip then a clean brake) as such hasn't effected accuracy but is very meh. First thing I did was undid barrel screws and retorqued to 60% of spec as spec is way to high if there is any oil or assembly on the threads. Have some match ammo arriving soon to test its capabilities. Also for the price if it doesnt work out buy a new barrel from Lilja etc and problem solved.

I haven't heard of many (any?) CZ 455's not shooting accurately - I've had 2 (17hmr and 22 mag) now only the 22 mag, mate has 3 - all very repeatable and accurate - my 22 mag shoots around an inch at 100 yards with the Hornady highest velocity ammo which is great for me. Admittedly my sample isn't large and therefore representative.
Question - will a stainless CZ455 be any more accurate / consistent than a standard blued version?

Originally Posted by Garret

I haven't heard of many (any?) CZ 455's not shooting accurately - I've had 2 (17hmr and 22 mag) now only the 22 mag, mate has 3 - all very repeatable and accurate - my 22 mag shoots around an inch at 100 yards with the Hornady highest velocity ammo which is great for me. Admittedly my sample isn't large and therefore representative.
Question - will a stainless CZ455 be any more accurate / consistent than a standard blued version?

Doubt it. Unless the barrel of the stainless steel version is of a higher quality and better machining.

Normally the extra cost is from the cost of stainless steel.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

I can't add much to the conversation apart from I have a CZ452 22LR which is good. It took me a little while to realise that the rifle is more accurate than I am. I really had to work on my groups at 50 metres.

As a point of interest, Winchester make subsonic WMR rounds now. If they are any good (I don't know), it would make the WMR quite versatile.

Of all the 455 I worked on, all of them had negative tentions into the receiver when bolted into their wooden stock. The inletting is crap basically.
Start with a good bedding job with no tension or set it up into an mdt chassis or similar and then you might see things improving. Also from the factory the retaining screws of the barrel must have been torqued with an impact driver because they are sometime really hard to undo.

22WMR vs 17HMR here in NZ is almost a pointless discussion. Anything you can do with either, you can do better with a small centrefire, and with a small centrefire they can do everything the WMR/HWR can and more. And WMR/HMR ammo is nearly the same price as 223 here. But if handloading, you get it cheaper and with better consistency. Critters like rabbits , etc are ideal for a 204, or 223, 222 or even a hornet (22 or 17 either works).

As for the 455, I would suggest a CZ 452 .

It is a bit of a first world problem as I would be happy with which ever one I was given, and would enjoy the experience of looking at each to buy one for myself....

17 HMR great cartridge out to 150-180 metres, I have a Weihrauch, better version of an Anschultz, just bought a Kimber in 223, now that’s a nice rifle, CZs are pretty crappy these days.

The Wiehrauch is a dam good rifle. As is the Krico.

Originally Posted by Russian 22.

Doubt it. Unless the barrel of the stainless steel version is of a higher quality and better machining.

Normally the extra cost is from the cost of stainless steel.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

Stainless is cheaper. As synthetic is cheaper than walnut. Also the machining of stainless is easier I thought which contributed more to it's accuracy.

Originally Posted by Stocky

Stainless is cheaper. As synthetic is cheaper than walnut. Also the machining of stainless is easier I thought which contributed more to it's accuracy.

The more you know. I always thought the stainless was more expensive.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

Turns out I lie the blued synthetic are cheaper at $659 from reloaders. My Stainless was $750 new with an extra steel magazine which was cheaper than the blued synthetic also in store but why buy blued in a synthetic stock ewww. The blued walnut with open sights and stock to suit are $729 and $799 for the straight comb american. So really its all pretty ball park.

We this thread has come alive in the last few days,
Ended up buying a Volquartsen, 22 mag, miss matched price tags in store, showing $500 less than there web price, Still bloody expensive $1899 cad,
The sako finfire II, is a very nice rifle.
Ive had it out shooting gophers, and have 230 odd kills with it, I am very impressed, great walking varminter, accurate, with CCI 40gr and 34gr showing penny sized groups under gusty windy conditions, must recheck one calm day.