Sako 85 Or CZ

[IvW]

I did not either for quite a while, then it dawned on me that there actually is a pretty good rationale for it. In this case too, it has nothing to do with firing the gun, but with safe manipulation.

In the second position (intermediary position with firing pin blocked but bolt movement allowed) one can unload a cartridge from the chamber WHILE KEEPING THE FIRING PIN LOCKED, or empty a magazine by cycling the cartridges in and out of the chamber (for those who do not want to open the bottom of the magazine or who have locked their magazine bottom to avoid inadvertent ammo dumping under recoil) WHILE KEEPING THE FIRING PIN LOCKED, which is clearly safer than doing so with a bolt ready to fire should the trigger be inadvertently touched during unloading manipulations.

Clever guy this Paul Mauser

I have actually modified some 2 position firing-pin-blocking safeties (which is easy to do) to allow opening the bolt while the firing pin is still blocked, jut to be able to unload the gun while keeping the safety on.

I agree with that concept on a PG rifle or with somebody who does not use a rifle as often as others.

On my DG rifles, I prefer two position safety. Safe and fire.

Gun safety is up to the person handling the firearm. During my military career that was drilled into me so many times and on such a consistent basis that it became second nature.

I carried that through to my hunting career. There is never a loaded rifle on my truck. I will never sling or shoulder a loaded rifle(on safe or not). When action is imminent and I chamber a round the rifle is always in both my hands whether the safety is engaged or not.

I see the point for the addition safety when emptying a rifle. With the controlled feeds I use, I push the bolt forward just as far as it needs to go to get the cartridge to come out the magazine and then back to eject.

Never ever had an issue with that but then I am very conscious of what I am doing when operating the bolt of a rifle.

Another thing that got drilled into me was how many rounds I have actually fired, as soon as the last one goes I instinctively go for the bullets that I carry on a wristband. I know at any given time how many bullets I have left in the rifle. If at all possible I always reload(top up) after each shot.

I have however seen on more than one occasion hunters not push the safety far enough forward with a three position safety and then obviously miss the opportunity to take a shot. This can also start screwing with your mind when needing to get into action under stress.

I am all for gun safety but personally prefer the good old two position variety.

 

[One Day...]

I agree with that concept on a PG rifle or with somebody who does not use a rifle as often as others.

On my DG rifles, I prefer two position safety. Safe and fire.

Gun safety is up to the person handling the firearm. During my military career that was drilled into me so many times and on such a consistent basis that it became second nature.

I carried that through to my hunting career. There is never a loaded rifle on my truck. I will never sling or shoulder a loaded rifle(on safe or not). When action is imminent and I chamber a round the rifle is always in both my hands whether the safety is engaged or not.

I see the point for the addition safety when emptying a rifle. With the controlled feeds I use, I push the bolt forward just as far as it needs to go to get the cartridge to come out the magazine and then back to eject.

Never ever had an issue with that but then I am very conscious of what I am doing when operating the bolt of a rifle.

Another thing that got drilled into me was how many rounds I have actually fired, as soon as the last one goes I instinctively go for the bullets that I carry on a wristband. I know at any given time how many bullets I have left in the rifle. If at all possible I always reload(top up) after each shot.

I have however seen on more than one occasion hunters not push the safety far enough forward with a three position safety and then obviously miss the opportunity to take a shot. This can also start screwing with your mind when needing to get into action under stress.

I am all for gun safety but personally prefer the good old two position variety.

No disagreement on my part. I concur 100% with everything you say about safe gun handling and mechanical safeties - which are two different things as you well know and practice, but which too many less experienced people tend to confuse; I concur with the fact that there is no need to close a CRF bolt, hence cock the action, when unloading its magazine; and I concur with counting the rounds fired (that was another advantage of non-auto fire in military situations - beside applying aimed fire - you never found yourself with an empty weapon at the wrong time when counting your rounds ;-)

I also agree with the fact that some folks cannot take a shot, and miss opportunities because they only move the safety from third to second position on a Win 70 type safety, and do not understand why the rifle does not fire. I too have seen it happen with my own eyes. This is another human factor failure, but one that a 2 position firing-pin-blocking safety (like on the Mark V) alleviates.

Two positions are NEEDED. The third position is somewhat superfluous.

To me the position that serves very limited purpose in a 3 position safety is the "third" position, the one that locks the bolt. After 40 years of hunting I have yet to discover what advantage locking the bolt has on a hunting rifle. Maybe it is because I carry my rifle the old European way, left shoulder, barrel forward and bolt away from my body, so I have never had a bolt open accidentally while carrying a rifle. I am not sure. What advantage do you find in locking the bolt? Maybe I am missing something?

 

[IvW]

No disagreement on my part. I concur 100% with everything you say about safe gun handling and mechanical safeties - which are two different things as you well know and practice, but which too many less experienced people tend to confuse; and with the fact that there is no need to close a CRF bolt, hence cock the action, when unloading its magazine.

I also agree with the fact that some folks cannot take a shot, and miss opportunities because they only move the safety from third to second position on a Win 70 type safety, and do not understand why the rifle does not fire. I too have seen it happen with my own eyes. This is another human factor failure, but one that a 2 position firing-pin-blocking safety (like on the Mark V) alleviates.

Two positions are NEEDED. The third position is somewhat superfluous.

To me the position that serves very limited purpose in a 3 position safety is the "third" position, the one that locks the bolt. After 40 years of hunting I have yet to discover what advantage locking the bolt has on a hunting rifle. Maybe it is because I carry my rifle the old European way, left shoulder, barrel forward and bolt away from my body (?) so I have never had a bolt open accidentally while carrying a rifle. I am not sure. What advantage do you find in locking the bolt? Maybe I am missing something?

The main reason is that it basically keeps the bolt handle in the correct place so when the time comes to shoot all you need to do is disengage the safety. If the bolt handle is slightly up the rifle will not fire.

All my ZKK actioned rifles are two position and when on safe they also lock the bolt in place.

3 position safety if in the middle position and the bolt handle is slightly up and you go to fire the rifle will not fire, the bolt needs to be all the way down.

 

[One Day...]

Sako 85 are beautiful rifles. I’ve owned several in 375 H&H. Feeding was flawless. Only drawback is they are NOT a CRF. The cases will eject and hit the turret of a scope because the extractor blade position.

This is actually a very understandable and very common misconception.

The only and true functional test of Controlled Round Feed (CRF) is: does the bolt control (i.e. carries) the round during feeding from the magazine into the chamber?

The shape and location of the extractor have actually nothing to do with CRF function.

For example, here it true CRF on a non-Mauser bolt design (a Steyr Mannlicher Luxus bolt in this case). The bolt grabs the cartridge out of the magazine and controls it i.e. carries it into the chamber.

As can be seen, the bolt does not have a big Mauser-style external extractor but it is nonetheless a true CRF bolt.

This was the major technical advantage of the Luxus series over the standard series with Steyr Mannlicher in the 70's (beside a metal magazine and bottom). Few people realized it and it was never really marketed, but this was significant.

I do own a Sako, and I love it - these are truly high quality rifles - but mine is an older .243 Forester shortened for the kids (https://www.africahunting.com/media...shortened-stock-to-12-5-length-of-pull.70373/) so I have never tested a Sako 85 CRF function, but I am willing to take a bet that it actually is a true CRF.

You see, there are two telltale signs in a CRF bolt design. First: does it have an opening at the bottom to allow the cartridge to slide under the extractor while coming out of the magazine? The Sako 85 does. Second: does the bolt have a spring loaded ejector in the bolt face that would prevent the bolt from grabbing the cartridge as it comes out of the magazine? The Sako 85 does not.

I am willing to bet that dchamp is right, the Sako 85 is indeed a modified design (compared to the quintessential Mauser 98), but it actually IS a CRF design. dchamp can test this and show us by putting one round in the magazine; pushing the bolt forward until the cartridge comes out of the magazine and is grabbed by the bolt, without closing it (i.e. the gun remains safe); removing the bolt smoothly with the cartridge still attached to it; and posting the picture.

I hope this was useful and interesting

PS: I too like the weight of the CZ 550. Mine is in .416 Rigby and is "improved" with a Gentry 3 position safety; New England Custom Gun 5/32 white bead front sight; Bell & Carlson Medalist Kevlar & Aramid stock with full length aluminum bedding block and pillars; "slicked-up" action; and a Schmidt & Bender 1 1/4-4x20 30 mm tube in Alaska Arms QD mount. The iron sights are regulated for 25 m/yd and the scope is sighted for 50 m/yd and 100 m/yd zero, -6" @ 200 m/yd. Let me share a little secret: the Bell & Carlson stock is ever so slightly deeper than the factory wood stock, so it allows the action to close comfortably on 4 rounds in the magazine, which the factory stock does not. This makes it a 4+1 gun instead of a 3+1. It weighs exactly 10 lbs 10 oz unloaded, which is about right and makes the recoil not unpleasant at all.

I used to have a custom Griffin & Howe in .340 Wby built on a ZKK 602 action, but it is gone: https://www.africahunting.com/media...rno-602-action-damaged-during-handling.65928/

 

[One Day...]

The main reason is that it basically keeps the bolt handle in the correct place so when the time comes to shoot all you need to do is disengage the safety. If the bolt handle is slightly up the rifle will not fire.

All my ZKK actioned rifles are two position and when on safe they also lock the bolt in place.

3 position safety if in the middle position and the bolt handle is slightly up and you go to fire the rifle will not fire, the bolt needs to be all the way down.

Yes, that makes sense, a locked bolt cannot come out of battery. Never happened to me, but there is always a first time lurking in the future LOL

 

[markferrigno]

A few thoughts on CZ and CRF...

Roughness / Smoothness of the CZ / ZKK

If you are observant of contact points on the CZ/ZKK (these are iterations of the same action coming from the same plant, before and after the fall of communism), and if you are willing to spend two hours with the appropriate fine grit sand paper and valve grinding compound, you will be positively amazed at how slick a standard CZ 550 will become for a grand expenditure of about a few pennies (excluding your time).

Check specifically:

1) how the central edge of the magazine follower plate binds inside the grove for the ejector blade in the under side of the bolt (solved by rounding the central edge of the follower);

2) how the burrs of the ejector blade grind inside the ejector grove of the bolt (solved by deburring/polishing the ejector blade);

3) how the burrs of the lower rear bridge machining grind against the bolt (solved by deburring/polishing the machining of the lower rear bridge);

4) how the forward edge of the extractor collar binds inside the upper rear bridge (solved by rounding the edges of the extractor collar and polishing the inside of the rear bridge);

5) how the machining burrs on the inside and lower faces of the feeding lips grind against the feeding cartridges (solved by polishing carefully - but NOT REMOVING MATERIAL from - the feeding lips).

6) coat liberally the bolt with valve grinding compound and cycle the bolt one thousand times while watching TV.

Again, you will be amazed at the results..

Why can't the factory do this to the action before it leaves? Why is it up to the customer to fix what the factory obviously knows is not right? Why do I have to fix their laziness..........

 

[bassasdaindia]

I own several modified CZ 550,s and i have owned Sako 85’s , IMHO there is no contest between them .

CZ 550 would be my choice , note that i have modified all of them to my satisfaction and at a cost .

 

[One Day...]

A few thoughts on CZ and CRF...
Roughness / Smoothness of the CZ / ZKK

Why can't the factory do this to the action before it leaves? Why is it up to the customer to fix what the factory obviously knows is not right? Why do I have to fix their laziness..........

A very good question indeed!

The answer might be that there is a reason why these guns only cost around $1,000.

I tend to think that the rough finish would be scandalous in a $X,000 or $xx,000 rifle, but I will admit that I find that CZ offers such an incredibly high value/price proposition in their $1,000 genuine-magnum-length-true-Mauser-action rifle, and I am so grateful that they resurrected the field grade .416 Rigby, .404 Jeffery, .450 Rigby, .505 Gibbs, etc. that I personally accept willingly a diamond in the rough from them ... because a diamond it is!

I mean, seriously, what is the next price point for a genuine, true magnum length (i.e. Rigby sized), true Mauser action rifle in African calibers with all steel bottom, integral rear sight barrel mount, barrel band front sight, integral scope bases? Who else offers one off-the-shelf financially accessible to about any hunter?

Yeah, they are rough off the factory, but man oh man what value with a few hours of TLC!

 

[bassasdaindia]

A very good question indeed!

The answer might be that there is a reason why these guns only cost around $1,000.

I tend to think that the rough finish would be scandalous in a $X,000 or $xx,000 rifle, but I will admit that I find that CZ offers such an incredibly high value/price proposition in their $1,000 genuine-magnum-length-true-Mauser-action rifle, and I am so grateful that they resurrected the field grade .416 Rigby, .404 Jeffery, .450 Rigby, .505 Gibbs, etc. that I personally accept willingly a diamond in the rough from them ... because a diamond it is!

I mean, seriously, what is the next price point for a genuine, true magnum length (i.e. Rigby sized), true Mauser action rifle in African calibers with all steel bottom, integral rear sight barrel mount, barrel band front sight, integral scope bases? Who else offers one off-the-shelf financially accessible to about any hunter?

Yeah, they are rough off the factory, but man oh man what value with a few hours of TLC!

adding to which they are so much fun to customise to your personal preference .

 

[IvW]

For me the main advantage is the the extraction of a true CRF action and not the feeding. Never ever had my Weatherby actioned 338 not feed.

The main advantage(on a DG rifle I might add) is the extraction.

Some push feeds have issues with extraction. Now for DG backup you need a action that will extract every time. Be that extraction a empty shell or be that extraction a full round that did not fire.

My very first DG rifle was a Remington model 700 classic in 375 H&H. Apart from the fact that it was too light for caliber and kicked like a mule with full power loads, it would not eject a un-fired round. The ejector spring was just too weak. The cartridge would end up on top of the stack and if you did not tilt the rifle would cause a jam. Something I could not live with in a DG rifle. I got rid of it after the first season and bought a ZKK 602 and the problem was solved.

Comparing the puny extractor claw of a M700 to that of the ZKK will also alleviate any doubts anybody may have may have.

 

[One Day...]

For me the main advantage is the the extraction of a true CRF action and not the feeding. Never ever had my Weatherby actioned 338 not feed.

The main advantage(on a DG rifle I might add) is the extraction.

Some push feeds have issues with extraction. Now for DG backup you need a action that will extract every time. Be that extraction a empty shell or be that extraction a full round that did not fire.

My very first DG rifle was a Remington model 700 classic in 375 H&H. Apart from the fact that it was too light for caliber and kicked like a mule with full power loads, it would not eject a un-fired round. The ejector spring was just too weak. The cartridge would end up on top of the stack and if you did not tilt the rifle would cause a jam. Something I could not live with in a DG rifle. I got rid of it after the first season and bought a ZKK 602 and the problem was solved.

Comparing the puny extractor claw of a M700 to that of the ZKK will also alleviate any doubts anybody may have may have.

Please IvW, I think we know each other well enough by now, and you know that what I am going to say is not antagonistic but in the interest of the AH community's knowledge

Factually, your Remington EXTRACTION was perfectly fine, which is a function of the extractor, the big visible part that is the hallmark of the Mauser 98 and that people like so much. But as you note, what was deficient with your Remington was the EJECTION, which would have been fixed by replacing the coil spring behind the ejector plunger (or, in many cases, just ensuring that the plunger cavity is not jammed with accumulated carbon & residue). This has been a grand classic with the Remington M40 .308 sniper rifles in the US military. A $0.5 stronger coil spring and 2 minutes to install it have been permanent and 100% fixes.

The ejection on a Mauser type action is performed by a blade in a raceway cut through the bolt, and it relies on the shooter vigorously pulling the bolt back against its rear stop. It certainly works, but it also has been known to fail. A worn out ejector blade on a Mauser can be as deadly as a worn out ejector spring on a Remington.

Actually, in the case of the CZ / ZKK action it can double fail because the ejector blade can wear out (it will eventually with enough shooting), and, in addition, the ejector blade is not fixed as in a Mauser, but it is lifted from under the bolt by a spring coil when the bolt is pulled halfway back. You could suffer a weakening spring-caused failure to eject on the CZ / ZKK just as much as on a Remington.

It makes sense to occasionally test this coil spring strength, and, like in the Remington, to ensure that its raceway is reasonably clean. Dried up grease could easily accumulate in it.

This being said, I too am a huge fan of the CZ / ZKK actions and consider them one of the best actions on the market as my other posts certainly attest, but I always feel that it is important to help folk understand how the hardware in their hands work so that they have a better opportunity to keep it perfectly operational, hence safe.

So the inescapable logical conclusion is that the beauty of CRF (Controlled Round Feed) is actually not in extraction/ejection, but indeed in the feed. Otherwise I reckon they would have called it CREE (Controlled Round Extraction/Ejection)...

I hope this was of interest

 

[Von S.]

I own several modified CZ 550,s and i have owned Sako 85’s , IMHO there is no contest between them .

CZ 550 would be my choice , note that i have modified all of them to my satisfaction and at a cost .

I wonder why winchester doesn't try to get away with the same stuff?

 

[One Day...]

I wonder why winchester doesn't try to get away with the same stuff?

Yep, if they accumulated built-in scope base (i.e. Sako type dovetail on the receiver, which would be REALLY easy for them to do) + their true CRF (which they had the good sense to come back to) + their hallmark 3 position firing-pin-blocking safety = they would have an unbeatable package.
Add a few really simple things such as barrel dovetail for rear sight (which they re-introduced but only on the Alaskan) + a barrel band front sling mount + a barrel band front sight = I mean, seriously, what would be missing?
Yes this would still not be a true magnum length action (i.e. Rigby sized), but they would own the .375 H&H, .416 Rem and .458 Lott (+ the entire family of .375 length cartridges) market.
Offer it for $1,500 in both stainless/Kevlar and blued/walnut and you have a de facto monopoly...

 

[BeeMaa]

The answer might be that there is a reason why these guns only cost around $1,000.

I mean, seriously, what is the next price point for a genuine, true magnum length (i.e. Rigby sized), true Mauser action rifle in African calibers with all steel bottom, integral rear sight barrel mount, barrel band front sight, integral scope bases? Who else offers one off-the-shelf financially accessible to about any hunter?

Yeah, they are rough off the factory, but man oh man what value with a few hours of TLC!

I'm a big fan of the CZ550 and have one with an AHR#2 upgrade.
The price plus the AHR upgrade is still cheaper than almost all others.
Plus I like the blocky feel, 5-round capacity, Mauser action, CRF (and ejection) and dovetailed QD scope ready bases.

 

[Von S.]

Yep, if they accumulated built-in scope base (i.e. Sako type dovetail on the receiver, which would be REALLY easy for them to do) + their true CRF (which they had the good sense to come back to) + their hallmark 3 position firing-pin-blocking safety = they would have an unbeatable package.
Add a few really simple things such as barrel dovetail for rear sight (which they re-introduced but only on the Alaskan) + a barrel band front sling mount + a barrel band front sight = I mean, seriously, what would be missing?
Yes this would still not be a true magnum length action (i.e. Rigby sized), but they would own the .375 H&H, .416 Rem and .458 Lott (+ the entire family of .375 length cartridges) market.
Offer it for $1,500 in both stainless/Kevlar and blued/walnut and you have a de facto monopoly...

The reason why they don't do it is because they don't feel enough people would want it and the set up and run time would not be worth it.

Anyone who wanted to could make a 10" long Mauser action if they really ever wanted one simply by cutting it and welding pieces in. Or for that matter a 2" one by cutting a piece out and welding it back up.

 

[One Day...]

The reason why they don't do it is because they don't feel enough people would want it and the set up and run time would not be worth it.

Correct beyond a doubt. Plus maybe some corporate marketing geniuses, you know the type who make photo shoots and print brochures with bullet loaded backward in pistol magazines LOL

Anyone who wanted to could make a 10" long Mauser action if they really ever wanted one simply by cutting it and welding pieces in.

Yep, been done many times during the Mauser magnum length action desert crossing and when the iron curtain was too tight for ZKK 602 actions to sneak through.

 

[Von S.]

Pascal,

I was taught by 2 German gunsmiths. One was a Nazi and was in Germany in wwII and the other worked for our war effort.

When care is taken in cutting, machining, jigging , welding and faring in a beautiful action. Can be created.

 

[BenKK]

My Sako Brown Bear .500 Jeffery has tallied 21 buffalo this year.

CZs require a lot of work for me to be satisfied with the aesthetics and functionality of them.

The big Sako required a finer bead and is more enjoyable with a better recoil pad.

I prefer the big flag safeties or Winchester safeties, because I can’t get my brain to trust that those tiny things on Sakos and CZs won’t accidentally get bumped. So I rarely use the safety, preferring to chamber a round and jam my hand underneath the bolt.

Not sure about how controlled the bolt on the Sako is, but it was latched-on too good the other day when I was trying to withdraw a plastic-tipped CEB Safari Raptor. That took quite a bit of fiddling.

The Sako feeds brilliantly, and it feeds those CEB Safari Raptors slicker than it does Woodleigh PPSNs.

 

[IvW]

Please IvW, I think we know each other well enough by now, and you know that what I am going to say is not antagonistic but in the interest of the AH community's knowledge

Factually, your Remington EXTRACTION was perfectly fine, which is a function of the extractor, the big visible part that is the hallmark of the Mauser 98 and that people like so much. But as you note, what was deficient with your Remington was the EJECTION, which would have been fixed by replacing the coil spring behind the ejector plunger (or, in many cases, just ensuring that the plunger cavity is not jammed with accumulated carbon & residue). This has been a grand classic with the Remington M40 .308 sniper rifles in the US military. A $0.5 stronger coil spring and 2 minutes to install it have been permanent and 100% fixes.

The ejection on a Mauser type action is performed by a blade in a raceway cut through the bolt, and it relies on the shooter vigorously pulling the bolt back against its rear stop. It certainly works, but it also has been known to fail. A worn out ejector blade on a Mauser can be as deadly as a worn out ejector spring on a Remington.

Actually, in the case of the CZ / ZKK action it can double fail because the ejector blade can wear out (it will eventually with enough shooting), and, in addition, the ejector blade is not fixed as in a Mauser, but it is lifted from under the bolt by a spring coil when the bolt is pulled halfway back. You could suffer a weakening spring-caused failure to eject on the CZ / ZKK just as much as on a Remington.

It makes sense to occasionally test this coil spring strength, and, like in the Remington, to ensure that its raceway is reasonably clean. Dried up grease could easily accumulate in it.

This being said, I too am a huge fan of the CZ / ZKK actions and consider them one of the best actions on the market as my other posts certainly attest, but I always feel that it is important to help folk understand how the hardware in their hands work so that they have a better opportunity to keep it perfectly operational, hence safe.

So the inescapable logical conclusion is that the beauty of CRF (Controlled Round Feed) is actually not in extraction/ejection, but indeed in the feed. Otherwise I reckon they would have called it CREE (Controlled Round Extraction/Ejection)...

I hope this was of interest

No antagonism taken and it was most certainly of interest.

I am always fascinated by your thorough explanations mine being rather "rough" so to speak.

I did have that M700 back to the agents who I bought it from. They could never get it to eject an un fired round. That coupled with the other issues I had with this rifle made me dislike this firearm quite soon in my career. Luckily I then discovered the ZKK Brnos and have not looked back since.

Actually, in the case of the CZ / ZKK action it can double fail because the ejector blade can wear out (it will eventually with enough shooting).....

That made me just take out my 500 Jeff and first 375 H&H that I have used the most to check the ejector blades!! Both are still fine and pop up effortlessly when pushed down and released!!

I must add that I always clean my rifles while hunting(another habit that came over from my military training) and have some things that I always do. Daily the bolt will come out and inspected, the magazine drop plate is opened and the inside inspected for dirt as well as the spring blade, a bore snake goes through the barrel each and every round I take with me gets cycled through the action and then back into the mag, shell holder and arm wrist band irrespective if I did it the day before with exactly the same rounds.

Yes, any rifle can fail and suffer damage but we could also have a meteor strike and end up standing in the wrong place went it happens.

I guess the best is to find the ones that potentially are less likely to fail when used for the intended purpose.

I own 4 ZKK actioned Brno's and have never ever had one of them fail to extract or eject, neither have I ever seen it happen in the field or heard of such from others using them.

Well not quite-After I sold the M700, I got a 375 H&H on a Brno ZKK 602 action. Used that rifle extensively. As I progressed into a lot of DG hunting, I realized that even though I had the King of the medium bores that the cartridge was lacking in stopping ability on Elephant and Buffalo unless the shot placement was perfect. My mentors at the time used 500's, one a 505 Gibbs on a P14 action and the other a .500 Jeff on a ZKK 602 action. Both where devastatingly effective on the largest of game. I did get opportunity to use both rifles. The Gibbs use to rattle my teeth,(the rifle did not fit me very well) and I did not like the cock on closing feature, the .500 Jeff on the other hand was a sweet rifle to shoot. So the hunt was on for a .500 Jeff on a ZKK 602 action.

Luck was on my side and I happened upon a .500 Jeff on a ZKK 602 action that had been custom built for somebody who passed away before he took ownership of the rifle. I bought that rifle for the pricey sum of R12500 rand. I had the stock worked on as it was quite bulky and thick, until it fit me. I then started hunting with this rifle using 535 Woodleighs loaded by Superior ammunition. No problems.

Then I stepped up to 570 gr Rhino bullets. At that time I had just started out in reloading my own ammunition due to cost and availability. Things like "throat" and "jump" where just read about in books. Off to the range we go to test these new buffalo and elephant slayers. Close the bolt on the first round and I feel it takes some effort to close! Mmmm better take it out and check what is the issue. Lift the bolt with some effort and find it stuck solid!! Instead of using common sense and finding somebody with more experience, I set the butt down on the ground and put boot to the bolt handle. On the second attempt the bolt flies open spilling all the powder into the action! The bullet firmly lodged in the lands!! I know, I Know but those where the folly's of youth!!

Not sure if the M700 extractor would have survived that treatment but the ZKK 602 did.

Off to the gunsmith to rectify the problem and cut the chamber to accommodate the longer 570 and 600 gr bullets and never had any issue again.

As you mention and quite rightly so, for proper ejection, especially with a un fired round the bolt needs to be pulled all the way back and with sufficient speed in order for the ejector blade to eject it properly. If you extract the round slowly and all the way back(as in trying to reload quietly to change from a soft to a solid), the round will end up on top of the stack. Which if done correctly can be a good thing as it does allow for quite operation. A bit more vigorously and the round ejects.

This also makes for easy emptying of the mag without having to pick up rounds from the ground.

Yes the fixed blade on a mauser is probably better, but the design on the ZKK is equally good in my opinion.

You will need a lot of gunk in that part of the action to have the ejector blade jam in the down position. The upward motion will expel any small practicals like dust.

Can they fail, of course, failures can occur on any firearm no matter the make or the maker who put them together.

I do feel however that certain action types are better suited to certain applications. The M700 is a superb platform for a very accurate rifle, the same goes for the Weatherby action, one of the strongest and potentially most accurate actions available(my 338 Lapua is on a Weatherby mark V action).

Do they make good reliable actions for use by a PH as a DG back up rifle? Not in my experience, no.

Each will choose and use what they prefer but a lot of the success or failure with any tool is the ability of the user to understand that tool and it's workings and use it accordingly and in so doing become proficient with that tool and have the confidence to use that tool.

The tools for the job will also vary considerable depending on the application.

My daughter has a T shirt that says, "I am with Batman", well "I am with Rigby", give me a Brno ZKK as a reliable working rifle for back up work any day of the week.

Thanks for your factual and precise replies to some comments I make, It is most certainly all the better for the AH Community.(As long as we do not get into any 308W discussions!!!)

I will most certainly now include checking the ejector blade and function on my ZKK's whenever in the field.

 

[One Day...]

No antagonism taken and it was most certainly of interest.

I am always fascinated by your thorough explanations mine being rather "rough" so to speak.

I did have that M700 back to the agents who I bought it from. They could never get it to eject an un fired round. That coupled with the other issues I had with this rifle made me dislike this firearm quite soon in my career. Luckily I then discovered the ZKK Brnos and have not looked back since.

Actually, in the case of the CZ / ZKK action it can double fail because the ejector blade can wear out (it will eventually with enough shooting).....

That made me just take out my 500 Jeff and first 375 H&H that I have used the most to check the ejector blades!! Both are still fine and pop up effortlessly when pushed down and released!!

I must add that I always clean my rifles while hunting(another habit that came over from my military training) and have some things that I always do. Daily the bolt will come out and inspected, the magazine drop plate is opened and the inside inspected for dirt as well as the spring blade, a bore snake goes through the barrel each and every round I take with me gets cycled through the action and then back into the mag, shell holder and arm wrist band irrespective if I did it the day before with exactly the same rounds.

Yes, any rifle can fail and suffer damage but we could also have a meteor strike and end up standing in the wrong place went it happens.

I guess the best is to find the ones that potentially are less likely to fail when used for the intended purpose.

I own 4 ZKK actioned Brno's and have never ever had one of them fail to extract or eject, neither have I ever seen it happen in the field or heard of such from others using them.

Well not quite-After I sold the M700, I got a 375 H&H on a Brno ZKK 602 action. Used that rifle extensively. As I progressed into a lot of DG hunting, I realized that even though I had the King of the medium bores that the cartridge was lacking in stopping ability on Elephant and Buffalo unless the shot placement was perfect. My mentors at the time used 500's, one a 505 Gibbs on a P14 action and the other a .500 Jeff on a ZKK 602 action. Both where devastatingly effective on the largest of game. I did get opportunity to use both rifles. The Gibbs use to rattle my teeth,(the rifle did not fit me very well) and I did not like the cock on closing feature, the .500 Jeff on the other hand was a sweet rifle to shoot. So the hunt was on for a .500 Jeff on a ZKK 602 action.

Luck was on my side and I happened upon a .500 Jeff on a ZKK 602 action that had been custom built for somebody who passed away before he took ownership of the rifle. I bought that rifle for the pricey sum of R12500 rand. I had the stock worked on as it was quite bulky and thick, until it fit me. I then started hunting with this rifle using 535 Woodleighs loaded by Superior ammunition. No problems.

Then I stepped up to 570 gr Rhino bullets. At that time I had just started out in reloading my own ammunition due to cost and availability. Things like "throat" and "jump" where just read about in books. Off to the range we go to test these new buffalo and elephant slayers. Close the bolt on the first round and I feel it takes some effort to close! Mmmm better take it out and check what is the issue. Lift the bolt with some effort and find it stuck solid!! Instead of using common sense and finding somebody with more experience, I set the butt down on the ground and put boot to the bolt handle. On the second attempt the bolt flies open spilling all the powder into the action! The bullet firmly lodged in the lands!! I know, I Know but those where the folly's of youth!!

Not sure if the M700 extractor would have survived that treatment but the ZKK 602 did.

Off to the gunsmith to rectify the problem and cut the chamber to accommodate the longer 570 and 600 gr bullets and never had any issue again.

As you mention and quite rightly so, for proper ejection, especially with a un fired round the bolt needs to be pulled all the way back and with sufficient speed in order for the ejector blade to eject it properly. If you extract the round slowly and all the way back(as in trying to reload quietly to change from a soft to a solid), the round will end up on top of the stack. Which if done correctly can be a good thing as it does allow for quite operation. A bit more vigorously and the round ejects.

This also makes for easy emptying of the mag without having to pick up rounds from the ground.

Yes the fixed blade on a mauser is probably better, but the design on the ZKK is equally good in my opinion.

You will need a lot of gunk in that part of the action to have the ejector blade jam in the down position. The upward motion will expel any small practicals like dust.

Can they fail, of course, failures can occur on any firearm no matter the make or the maker who put them together.

I do feel however that certain action types are better suited to certain applications. The M700 is a superb platform for a very accurate rifle, the same goes for the Weatherby action, one of the strongest and potentially most accurate actions available(my 338 Lapua is on a Weatherby mark V action).

Do they make good reliable actions for use by a PH as a DG back up rifle? Not in my experience, no.

Each will choose and use what they prefer but a lot of the success or failure with any tool is the ability of the user to understand that tool and it's workings and use it accordingly and in so doing become proficient with that tool and have the confidence to use that tool.

The tools for the job will also vary considerable depending on the application.

My daughter has a T shirt that says, "I am with Batman", well "I am with Rigby", give me a Brno ZKK as a reliable working rifle for back up work any day of the week.

Thanks for your factual and precise replies to some comments I make, It is most certainly all the better for the AH Community.(As long as we do not get into any 308W discussions!!!)

I will most certainly now include checking the ejector blade and function on my ZKK's whenever in the field.

I am with you on the Rem 700 action. This is not my favorite action, by a long shot. To me it suffers 3 important shortcomings: its is not a CRF (strike 1), it does not offer a firing pin-blocking safety (strike 2) and it does not have integral scope mounts (strike 3).

I own a grand total of one Rem 700 because I wanted an as-issued Mk13 .300 Win Mag rifle, and I have never had any issue with it through 1,000 rounds so far (easy to count: I shot all I bought and need to restock LOL).

I would not build a DG gun on one. From the factories, CZ beats it 2-0 (CRF & integral scope base); Winchester 70 Classic beats it 2-0 (CRF and firing pin-blocking safety); Weatherby Mark V beats it 1-0 (firing pin-blocking safety); Sako 85 beats it 2-0 (CRF and integral scope base), etc. etc.

Yes, one can retrofit a firing pin-blocking safety on a Rem 700, but the absence of CRF and integral scope base cannot be remedied.

I am not saying that this is a bad action, it has proven itself for long enough all over the world, I am just saying that one can get additional features that I personally think are important on a rifle, for the same money...

To this day CZ remains the only I know off to offer these 3 necessary (in my view) features, admittedly with the firing pin-blocking safety as an aftermarket add-on. If only CZ could offer this action in stainless steel too...

PS: come to think of it, I do have an experience with Rem 700 extraction. My Remington Defense barreled action and Accuracy International chassis (i.e. the Mk13 rifle) came from the dealer Euro Optic with a chamber so poorly finished (as well many other issues - these were the last years before Remington's bankruptcy and quality was in the toilet) that I could not extract the shells of the Hornady 195 gr BTHP Match .300 Win Mag, even though they chambered smoothly. Even banging on the bolt handle with a baseball bat sized piece of wood at the shooting range did not work. I had to use a large rubber mallet back at home to get the shell out. I tested again the factory ammo the following day (maybe I had one factory overload? Rare but possible), but same issue. This time I had the mallet in the truck with me. I am not making tis up, you can read the story on my review at https://www.eurooptic.com/Rem700p300-AT-GR-FI-Remington-700P-5R-300-Win-Mag-with-Accur.aspx. Long story short. The Remington extractor did it job; it extracted shells from the chamber even though the shell left a fair amount of brass in the chamber...