Is a 77/22 worth the extra cash? Any alternatives?

[ArmedBear]

That's a .17 HMR, right? That's not a .22LR.

.5 to 1 MOA at 50 yards isn't exactly impressive with .17 HMR. You do know that half an inch at 50 yards is 1 MOA, not .5, right? It's not bad, of course, but it's not "holy crap!" either.

I'm not putting down CZ's. I've seen MUCH better groups from one, at 100 yards, like 10 through a dime.

Modified 10/22s are highly accurate guns. I don't like putting gold jewelry on a pig myself, but to say they're not accurate is just plain wrong. The design works quite well. I just think my bone-stock 10/22 is a better working gun, because it's a lot cheaper and it shoots plenty good enough.

Bottom line? The CZ is a GREAT choice, if you like it. If you don't like it, it's not the only gun in the world.

 

[R.W.Dale]

That was just the picture I had on hand my ZKM452 Super Exclusive in .22lr shoots just as good but appearently I have yet to photograph any groups with that rifle. I'll have to rectify that

 

[swingset]

Have you shot both? I have

I own a CZ452lux and 2 77/22 heavy barrels.

News flash 10-22 are known for being inaccurate even after spending mega $$

(EDIT) I shoot benchrest in an auto-league. 50 shooters, and there's only 2 non-10/22's, neither one is leading the league. The top guns are hovering around .3" groups at 25 yards, .5" groups at 50 yards usually in a stiff wind. I doubt you could do that with your CZ.

For the price of a 77/22 and an aftermarket barrel you can buy 2 CZ's

Yeah, and how much to do a caliber change or thread a CZ barrel for a suppressor? The 77/22 is a customizable platform, whereas the CZ is not. Apples and oranges.

1 to 1/2 MOA from a bone stock gun with a sporter barrel. Where's your proof?

Excuse me if I don't pass out from pictures of 3-shot groups. Pretty much meaningless. Doesn't prove that CZ's are more accurate. Did you shoot it from a machine rest with a control group against a 77/22? Then it means pretty much ZIP.

I shot a match last month with my 77/22 in bolt class, and came in 2nd. My best group was .311", shooting 5 shots of Eley Club Xtra at 50 yards in 5mph crosswind. The only modification to my gun is a Timney sear, an $8 part. Factory bbl.

Does this prove anything? Not much. My CZ is very accurate, but not moreso than either of my 77's, and unlike you I shoot in a manner that would tell me.

Enjoy your gun, if it makes you happy that's great. (EDIT)

Note: The Mods DO pay attention. Name calling doesn't make your point any better. (Dr.Rob)

 

[jerkface11]

Armedbear said

The cheapest CZ's, the training rifles, have long barrels that slow down a .22 LR,

Exactly what do you base that assertion on?

 

[R.W.Dale]

You're clearly talking out of your rectum.

I just love it when personal attacks are ignored by the mods

I shoot benchrest in an auto-league

What the heck else are you going to shoot a Marlin 60 . Dodge Neon's look fast in the SCCA drivers cup when that's what all of the competitors drive.

 

[RH822]

I never owned a CZ or a 77-22, I do however own a Marlin 25n plain-Jane bottom of the barrel Wal-Mart stock POS. And it has killed more squirrels, woodchucks, crows and rabbits than I remember. The smallest group It has ever shot was 3 fox squirrels out for the same tree, put a bullet in the ear of each one at 30 yards. So I figure that's like the same hole...good enough for me. People like me think the CZ and 77\22 both over priced and just not worth the extra money.

Buy the Savage or (God forbid) a Marlin.

RH

 

[jerkface11]

Now that you mention it my savage 17hmr has a weaver rail not a 3/8" dovetail. Maybe the .22lr does too.

 

[stevekl]

Alright, i'm prepared to admit that you guys are for the most part right and I was being petty.

I slept on it and I decided on the 452.

The scope mount thing really is petty. I was obsessing over detail. It really is, for the price, a better rifle than the 77/22, and it has iron sights*.

So ok, you've convinced me.

*It has the only iron sights that really impress me outside of WW2 surplus. Has anyone noticed how dinky and useless most sights on rifles are nowadays? Why would anyone want a sight that you can only adjust with a damn screwdriver?

Edit: I'm not implying that you guys who are advocating the 77/22 were ignored by me I just weighed the arguments and all.

 

[R.W.Dale]

So I take it you decided on the trainer model, The rear tangent sight is awesome. I have more fun crankin the thing up to 200yds and ringing my 10"x10" steel spinner at that range than anything else.

Just remember the millet angle lock rings will work on either the 3/8" dovetail of the american model as well as the 11mm rail of the trainer/european models. And they will stay put.

I know what you mean about the factory Ruger sights. It used to cheese me off everytime I'ed think about the fact that that my $700 No1 came with the cheapest rear sight mankind has ever devised

MORE FLAMES

 

[Dr.Rob]

FYI we do pay attention... aside from some name calling the thread was otherwise informative and illustrated, if offering strong opinions.

Sounds like the Question was answered and a decision made.

This thread is closed.

Remember at the end of the day folks, it's just the internet.