First firing of CZ 457 jaguar

S

stagpanther

New member
Full disclosure--I have virtually 0 experience with 22lr so I have little familiarity with it. Could be I'm doing everything wrong so take my opinions with the usual grain of salt. ; ) I bought what 22lr ammo I could find, which wasn't a whole lot. I tried Armscor, Aquila, Ely tenex and RS50 I can't really say which shoots better, because I'm still trying to figure how to hold the rifle steady for the shot. But I think I'm going to stick with the RS 50, I had a couple one-hole groups going before 1 or two flyers.

My "first blush" opinion is that CZ has hampered the potential of the rifle with two things that make it difficult for me, 1. the foreend is so narrow and rounded that keeping it steady in a front bag (my preferred way of shooting) is challenging for me (a bit like watching a ping pong match when using a scope level). Compounding that is 2. the trigger is to my tastes quite stiff; I find that the measured 2.5 lb pull feels like it's even heavier since it seems to have a hard break point, I feel like I'm pulling on a trigger more like 3.5 to 4 pound pull. Despite all that I can tell that the rifle can be exceedingly accurate if I could just work out those issues. Definitely have to fix the trigger thing--right now it feels like I'm driving a Ferrari that came equipped with a VW beatle engine.

I managed to get a borescope into the bore--it looks spectacular!
 
Last edited:
Except for the trigger--the rifle I think is ready to "get serious" and I'll try it out on some of Revolver guy's on-line comp targets.:)

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5144.jpg
    IMG_5144.jpg
    171.6 KB · Views: 959
What re you trying to do with it? Target rifle?
Click to expand...
Enter Revolverguy's contest--and compare it to 17HMR. I already have a hunch from what little shooting I've done with it that at 50 yds 17 HMR confers little to no consistency advantage compared to the 22LR with the possible exception that there might be fewer flyers due to manufacturing inconsistencies between the cartridges.

In regards to the trigger's "hard" break, I might fool with the sear engagement to see if that can smooth it off a bit.
 
Last edited:
I have a cz452 in 17hmr, it shoots1/2 in at 100. See if you can get your hands on some cci standard velocity. It has shot well out if every 22 I have tried it in.

Before you fiddle with the trigger perhaps clean and lube it. Every gun I have had has had a dirty trigger group and cleaning has always improved them.
 
Before you fiddle with the trigger perhaps clean and lube it. Every gun I have had has had a dirty trigger group and cleaning has always improved them.
Click to expand...
The 457 trigger group is enclosed in a housing--to get at the internals you have to knock out a peened pin.
 
You seem to have mounted a .22 rifle to your scope :)

Truth be told I have a 452 American with “alota scope” myself. :)
 
You seem to have mounted a .22 rifle to your scope

Truth be told I have a 452 American with “alota scope” myself.
Click to expand...
It helps some, but then the parallax/shimmer at higher magnifications starts to make itself a hassle, so I don't really crank it up all that far. It's also FFP--so the reticle gets thicker too.
 
I tried shooting again today at the comp targets--at this point I think I'm just wasting ammo til I get the trigger sorted out. I also have to figure out how to get a better hold on the forend; I'm going to devise some modification to the stock (or perhaps give up and get an aftermarket one).
 
How's the cheek weld? I just see a lot of drop to the heel of the buttstock, because the rifle was designed to shoot using the sights. If all you're shooting is 50 yards a 3-9X33 EFR Leupold rimfire scope might be more comfortable to shoot and easier to get behind.
 
How's the cheek weld? I just see a lot of drop to the heel of the buttstock, because the rifle was designed to shoot using the sights. If all you're shooting is 50 yards a 3-9X33 EFR Leupold rimfire scope might be more comfortable to shoot and easier to get behind.
Click to expand...
I agree--it is quite a bit of drop and likely is meant for great shooting with the irons. The only limitation to the sight is that it's hooded and therefore doesn't "glow" very well because it's angled down--not straight, parallel to the bore. I can't pick on the rifle--it's very well made over-all for it's intended use, it was not meant to shoot 5 consecutive shots of .25 or so MOA at 50 yds necessary to nail all of Mr Revolverguy's target top row contest:D, which is unfortunately my current obsession (along with getting a 1-holer with my 280 AI). The bizarre thing is I've nailed the smallest dot 4 times now, but the others are elusive, and the most I've hit are 3 at one try. That top row I think "discriminates" against older eyes.:D That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it. The problem for me is that the lowest triggerpull setting of 2.5 lbs, along with the very slim foreend, together make it exceedingly difficult for me personally to hold the rifle rock steady through the shot. I may end up going full-on race-gun crazy before this is all over.

The "yo dave" spring is on it's way and should be here in a couple weeks (comes from Canada and probably has to go through weird customs crap), so that I hope will at least get me down below 2 lbs pull.

As far as scopes are concerned, I think what is really needed to get that top row checked off is a very fine reticle that has an open center point of aim. I have one last "secret weapon" scope to throw at the problem that fits that bill; my Leupold VX5 HD.:D
 
Last edited:
I looked at one today at KY Gun Co for around $500 I may have to get one. I was kind of looking at the 457 MTR, but I like the longer barrel on the jag.
 
I doubt the longer barrel really brings anything substantive to the table other than really good hunting with the longer sight radius between iron sights. Maybe that's why it has a stiffer trigger--I'm new to these things so I don't know. It is superbly constructed for sure, but if I were looking for mainly bench/target that MTR could be a better choice having a wider more stable chassis and lighter trigger pull (if available).
 
I don't really know how it happened, it started with ordering the reduced trigger spring from YoDave, and before I knew it I also had a KRG stock and Lilja match barrel attached to the 457.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5195.jpg
    IMG_5195.jpg
    134.9 KB · Views: 771
Hah, this cracks me up. You’re even worse than me. That thing looks pretty sweet. I do have an unmodified .22 though that just shoots crazy good and will stay box stock. It’s a plain old Savage B22 heavy barrel with a cheap Bushnell scope. This thing is so effortless to shoot accurately that it’s boring and I hardly ever shoot it. Bought it used and including adding the scope I’m well under $300.00.
 
It gets worse--my very first 22lr handloads! I couldn't wait for the actual dies to come in so I just jammed them together by hand.:D

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5196.jpg
    IMG_5196.jpg
    234.1 KB · Views: 775
Just did a quick function check of both rifle and ammo--everything seems to be fine. It's still a blast furnace outside and very humid--so I only put a bag on the hood of my truck to get on paper and see what a few groups looked like. I wasn't shooting for bench accuracy.

I started off with the armscor 36 gr ammo cause I have lots of it and it comes closest in weight to the cutting edge 32 gr bullets.

As you can see nothing to write home about.

attachment.php


Next up were my handloads using the cutting edge 32 gr solids. I was worried these would be tight in the chamber and bore--it turns out they cycled more easily than the factory stuff. I just picked a random charge of around 2 grs of longshot, and while the group is not great I was just happy it worked. Room for improvement.

attachment.php


Lastly, as a reality check I shot a group of RWS premium which had shot well in the stock CZ barrel. Although I was not shooting on a very stable set-up, it easily shot more accurately than the other two ammos.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5197.jpg
    IMG_5197.jpg
    103.8 KB · Views: 767
  • IMG_5199.jpg
    IMG_5199.jpg
    171 KB · Views: 776
  • IMG_5198.jpg
    IMG_5198.jpg
    113.5 KB · Views: 770
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top