CZ 550fs or Tikka T3 lite?

[adcoch1]

So I've been contemplating a new rifle lately, it will be a 30-06, and my needs are for hunting and casual target shooting from feeling there breath range to 600 yards. I have a great open sight Savage 30-06 already that can stay as is or wear a scope for the long stuff. Now the question: a CZ 550 fs? Or a Tikka T3 lite

I am an unashamed fanboy for CZ products, and the cost from the suppliers I've found puts these two rifles in virtually the same category, only about 100 bucks apart. The tikka is butter smooth and I really like the mag compared to a lot of other rifles detachable mags, but the CZ is also smooth as silk and I love the extra capacity of the hinged floorplate mag. And then there's the stock.... Beautiful Turkish walnut vs a really durable and comfortable functional synthetic that actually fits and feels good.
So what should I do?!....

 

[jmr40]

Both are very nice rifles, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. You have to decide which is more important, aesthetics, or function. I'd personally go with the much lighter weight and weather resistance of the Tikka. But there is no wrong answer here.

 

[eastbank]

i have used the cz,s in africa on four hunts and have found it a ex rifle, i have not had the chance to use a tikka, but think it would be a ex rifle also. at my age light rifles do make more sense for long hunts tho. eastbank.

 

[rbernie]

Both are very nice rifles, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. You have to decide which is more important, aesthetics, or function. I'd personally go with the much lighter weight and weather resistance of the Tikka

This.

The Tikka will be more accurate and will wear a scope much better than the CZ. The CZ is much prettier.

 

[fpgt72]

This more accurate then that....all open....a factory gun is a factory gun.

I will say if you want to hunt with it the plastic stock...sorry I am going to call it plastic....is going to take a lickin and keep on tickin a little better over the wood. It is just the way it is.

So if you are really on the fence looking for something that you are going to drag in the bush the stock is something I would look at and the wood one would make me cry the first time I scuffed it.

 

[rbernie]

This more accurate then that....all open....a factory gun is a factory gun.

Take two identical actions of the same design and manufacture and put one in a full length stock and the other in a free floated stock - the free floated action will outshoot the full-stocked version every day of the week. Anyone that's ever had a Ruger RSI or CZ FS can tell you all about that.

 

[Gtscotty]

I assume you've had the opportunity to handle both? The CZ 550 FS is nice, but I found it surprisingly chunky in hand. I've been very happy with my Tikkas (including a .30-06 T3) and am not one for having tree corpses bolted to my rifle actions, so the SS Tikka T3x ( includes a few nice-to-haves over the original T3) would be my choice. If you get an original T3 I would suggest switching out the tire rubber "recoil pad" with a limbsaver for a package that is lightweight, but still comfortable to shoot.

 

[I6turbo]

Take two identical actions of the same design and manufacture and put one in a full length stock and the other in a free floated stock - the free floated action will outshoot the full-stocked version every day of the week. Anyone that's ever had a Ruger RSI or CZ FS can tell you all about that.

This wives tale may be true about Rugers and others, but not necessarily CZs. I have 4 CZ FS guns and several non-FS models. The FS guns are generally as accurate as the others, and in some cases more so. Check out the CZ forums where others who have FS models along with other models and you'll find the same thing often reported; the FS is, contrary to conventional "wisdom," often the most accurate of the bunch. I'll also note that my FS models came from the factory essentially free-floated in that the barrel is only very lightly contacted by the end cap, but not along the channel. There's been all sorts of speculation on why the FS seems to be one of the most accurate models. The only sensible explanation/speculation I've seen is that accuracy somehow benefits from the very light contact at the end of the barrel, something akin to a tuner/damper. Who knows? But it is a consistent report from owners of various models that the FS does not take a back seat at all, accuracy wise.

An old photo of mine -- all wear scopes/different scopes now. And different finishes.

I've not yet put them to a side-by-side test, but I don't think this free-floated American will out-shoot this FS.

 

[rbernie]

This wives tale may be true about Rugers and others, but not CZs.

My experience is that it's not a wive's tale.

Speaking first from a mechanical engineering perspective, there is no doubt that pushing a wood stock to the end of the barrel and attaching it to the barrel will impart forces on the barrel from the stock that a free-floated design will not incur. Those forces will vary based on forearm pressure, wood shift/humidity, and so forth. That variability will negatively impact accuracy, if you forgive the pun. That's just the way that it is. Other factors influencing accuracy may mask that specific characteristic, but there is no doubt that the characteristic is real and measurable.

From a personal experience perspective, I had a CZ550FS in 30-06 that was clearly not as accurate (~1 MOA worse, on average) as any of my other CZ 550's. My Rugers were even worse; I'd see a ~ 1.5-2 MOA degradation between my regular MkIIs/Hawkeyes and an equivalent RSI.

 

[I6turbo]

My experience is that it's not a wive's tale.

Speaking first from a mechanical engineering perspective, there is no doubt that pushing a wood stock to the end of the barrel and attaching it to the barrel will impart forces on the barrel from the stock that a free-floated design will not incur. Those forces will vary based on forearm pressure, wood shift/humidity, and so forth. That variability will negatively impact accuracy, if you forgive the pun. That's just the way that it is. Other factors influencing accuracy may mask that specific characteristic, but there is no doubt that the characteristic is real and measurable.

Of course those old adages are why it's held as "conventional wisdom" that full stocks aren't as accurate, and why many CZ owners have been surprised to find that it didn't hold true.

From a personal experience perspective, I had a CZ550FS in 30-06 that was clearly not as accurate (~1 MOA worse, on average) as any of my other CZ 550's. My Rugers were even worse; I'd see a ~ 1.5-2 MOA degradation between my regular MkIIs/Hawkeyes and an equivalent RSI.

1 MOA worse than your other CZs and 1.5-2 MOA worse than your other Rugers? I don't blame you for getting a bad taste for full stocks with those results. I don't have a single CZ rifle that won't shoot 1 MOA groups, including the FS guns.

The only non-FS CZ of the 9 I have that I don't think the FS can more or less keep up with, accuracy wise, is this one. But against this type of gun it's not really a fair comparison, all else being equal.

 

[rbernie]

1 MOA worse than your other CZs and 1.5-2 MOA worse than your other Rugers? I don't blame you for getting a bad taste for full stocks with those results

Yes.

I don't have a single CZ rifle that won't shoot 1 MOA groups, including the FS guns.

My sample size for a CZ550FS was 1 rifle, and that's admittedly a single data point. But it was a 2MOA rifle at best.

 

[I6turbo]

Yes.
My sample size for a CZ550FS was 1 rifle, and that's admittedly a single data point. But it was a 2MOA rifle at best.

Did you try to work up a load for it, or try a variety of ammo to see if it got any better? I've found that CZs (like other guns with potential for good accuracy) can be somewhat ammo-sensitive. The 527 Varmint above is a good example. Below is a 70 yard (steps) target shot from that gun at the time that the photo was taken. On this target I shot four different makes/models of commercial ammo, three shots/group as a preliminary test. No barrel cleaning or anything between rounds.

• Top Left target was Hornady 55-grain V-Max Varmint Express (Hornady bullet)
• Top Right target was Black Hills Reman 52-grain MHP non-coated
• Center target and Lower Right target were both Swiss manufacture GECO 55-grain FMJ ($17 for 50 rounds)
• Lower Left target was Black Hills Reman 40-grain V-Max (Hornady bullet)

I shot other groups that day and the results remained consistent with those on this target. I've shot other makes of ammo through this and other 527s and, not surprisingly, seen even worse groups with bulk stuff like Wolf Gold. I've found the same thing with my other CZ rifles of various calibers, centerfire and rimfire -- that an individual gun may do much better with some ammo than others. Again, not surprising, but just more first-hand proof that well-suited ammo can make a big difference.

 

[adcoch1]

Thanks for the discussion, a little more explanation may be in order... The CZ I have handled, and it fits me very well. If I boughtthis rifle and it didn't perform well accuracy wise after some load research, I would probably still keep it for a cast bullet shooter based on its good looks. The Tikka on the other hand is the nicest utilitarian rifle I've played with. And its really light. I have a Savage that is doing duty for my big game needs at the moment, and I have other guns too.
The need for the tikka is for an all weather rifle that isn't just an ugly duckling that shoots. The need for the CZ is to have a beautiful accurate work of art. I can tune my Savage for short or long range, so either of these rifles is just to specialize a bit and give myself more tools for the jobs at hand. Besides, a guy can't have enough 30-06 rifles...

 

[viking499]

Take two identical actions of the same design and manufacture and put one in a full length stock and the other in a free floated stock - the free floated action will outshoot the full-stocked version every day of the week. Anyone that's ever had a Ruger RSI or CZ FS can tell you all about that.

Yep, my CZ 452 FS outshot all my other non FS 452's

 

[I6turbo]

adcoch1, as you can tell from my posts, I'd dismiss the notion that the CZ isn't going to be accurate. As with ANY individual gun, there's a chance it could happen, but the odds are so low that it's not something to base your decision on.

That said, I think your choice is clear: You're gonna need to buy both.

 

[adcoch1]

adcoch1, as you can tell from my posts, I'd dismiss the notion that the CZ isn't going to be accurate. As with ANY individual gun, there's a chance it could happen, but the odds are so low that it's not something to base your decision on.

That said, I think your choice is clear: You're gonna need to buy both.

You very well may be right. Buying both would also let me use my savage for a dedicated target gun if I wanted... And yes, the CZ should be accurate, they are technically free floated, the end cap doesn't apply pressure on the barrel anything like most mannlicher style stocks.

 

[I6turbo]

You very well may be right. Buying both would also let me use my savage for a dedicated target gun if I wanted... And yes, the CZ should be accurate, they are technically free floated, the end cap doesn't apply pressure on the barrel anything like most mannlicher style stocks.

There you go! Decision made.
Now I'm off to enable someone else.

 

[adcoch1]

There you go! Decision made.
Now I'm off to enable someone else.

Thanks.... I think.

 

[DPris]

I own the CZ FS in .30-06 & I've handled (but not yet fired) a couple Tikkas.

For me, I'm quite happy with the CZ, and of the two my natural tendency would be to go with the CZ's controlled round feed as opposed to the Tikka's push feed.

That may not matter to anybody else, but it does to me.
Denis

 

[fpgt72]

Take two identical actions of the same design and manufacture and put one in a full length stock and the other in a free floated stock - the free floated action will outshoot the full-stocked version every day of the week. Anyone that's ever had a Ruger RSI or CZ FS can tell you all about that.

Does not look like it.

 

[DPris]

Shoulda mentioned- I also own the Ruger .30-06 International version, the CZ easily outshoots it.
Denis

 

[Coltdriver]

I have owned several CZ's including a FS version. I have not owned a Tikka but do have a Sako which is the parent company of Tikka.

The thing you have to watch with the CZ's is the chamber and twist. I found them to all have the slowest possible twist and the chambers always had very long throats. The Bolt throw is such that you can only use the medium scope mounts which does leave you well above the barrel. They are really designed to be used with a 50 mm Objective scope in which case the medium rings work perfectly. I have been told that the newest CZ's use a tighter twist. I don't know if they tightened up the chambers or not.

You can dial in a load but I never got phenomenal accuracy out of any one of the CZ's. Hunting accuracy for sure but nothing to write home about.

550's are super quality rifles, no doubt. But I will not buy another one just because of my experience with the lousy chamber measurements. I also do not like the inability to mount a 40mm scope on anything other than medium rings.

The Tikka is a different rifle entirely. I like stainless and synthetic for hunting now. But thats my preference. I think the barrels are made by Sako but I am not positive.

I would take the Tikka over the CZ.

 

[hq]

I think the barrels are made by Sako but I am not positive.
I would take the Tikka over the CZ.

Barrels are "Sako" as Sako and Tikka are manufactured in the same factory. All in all Tikka is more or less a bare bones essentials line of Sako nowadays and while the build quality and accuracy are comparable, the latest features and higher quality (cosmetic) finish is mainly available on Sako branded rifles. As far as Tikka vs. CZ is concerned, it's a coin toss. Both are excellent rifles for the money; Tikka is a bit more utilitarian, CZ has a nicer finish.

 

[CB900F]

Fella's;

I've got both, & in fact several versions of both. My son's CZ550 fullstock in 6.5 Swede will ring the 1 foot diameter 600 yard gong 'bout any time he wants to point it in that direction. However, my left hand custom Swede is built on a Tikka action, in wood, and is also exceedingly accurate, though with a Lilja barrel. My T3 synthetic in .30-06 is no slouch either. Either would be fine, but if I were you, I'd get the CZ in 6.5 Swede, but then I'm a sucker for that cartridge.

900F

 

[cdb1]

The most accurate rifle I own is a CZ 550 American 6.5x55. I do believe as been previously stated it is the luck of the draw which of the two brands would be more accurate, even with a Mannlicher stocked CZ.

I do believe the CZ will have less felt recoil due to weight - very important to me because I have a bad shoulder. Tikka definitely more comfortable to carry because of weight.

Trigger: they are very different but excellent in their own right.

I don't think it matters to most people but I hate tiny ejection/loading ports which the T3 has. The newer model has a bigger port but it's still too small for my taste.

Those two rifles are so different that to me it isn't apples to apples but apples to oranges.