CZ 527 300 BLK

[rebel]

Crest. it's what I had. It's all full of pumice. As good a job as it does, makes me wonder about it's intended use.

[rookie07]

DS got it. edit - It is superior in every single way and should be for the price.

I'm not doubting you fellas because I am a CZ fan; however, (I'm playing devil's advocate) how is the CZ magnitudes better than the Ruger in everyway?

They both have a plastic stock. The Ruger is reported to be accurate - it's true. I have one. The CZ has a history of accuracy in many calibers.

I would be the CZ trigger is much better than the Ruger - which is terrible IMO - tremendous creep and spongy.

Outside of the trigger what's better?

The Ruger has performed well for me, but there is something about it I don't like which is why I am looking to alternatives. I don't want to drop another $300 or so into for later down the road realize it still is what it is.

I guess one of my biggest complaints is the size of the action in relation to the cartridge. That is quirky I know, but it is how I feel. The CZ 527, the Howa mini 1500, and the Remington Model 7 all would be more appropriately sized for it. Anyway, that's a tangent.

[rebel]

DS got it. edit - It is superior in every single way and should be for the price.

I'm not doubting you fellas because I am a CZ fan; however, (I'm playing devil's advocate) how is the CZ magnitudes better than the Ruger in everyway?

They both have a plastic stock. The Ruger is reported to be accurate - it's true. I have one. The CZ has a history of accuracy in many calibers.

I would be the CZ trigger is much better than the Ruger - which is terrible IMO - tremendous creep and spongy.

Outside of the trigger what's better?

The Ruger has performed well for me, but there is something about it I don't like which is why I am looking to alternatives. I don't want to drop another $300 or so into for later down the road realize it still is what it is.

I guess one of my biggest complaints is the size of the action in relation to the cartridge. That is quirky I know, but it is how I feel. The CZ 527, the Howa mini 1500, and the Remington Model 7 all would be more appropriately sized for it. Anyway, that's a tangent.

I'll answer that since you quoted me. I owned an RARR and sold it, then bought the CZ. So I have an opinion on both.
I've also been trying to avoid comparisons because the rifles are in two price tiers. For what you spend on the American, it's a decent rifle. I found mine reasonably accurate. The magazine was an issue, and I had to send my bolt back to Ruger. Mine never fed great. The for end of the stock was so floppy I ended up bedding the entire thing.
None of these things upset me, it was just improvements needed.
The CZs flaws were the mag nose diving, which didn't bother me much. The stock didn't flex near as much. Finish and fit were what to be expected. So far everything Ive shot through it has grouped generally tighter than the Ruger - what I expected for a rifle costing that much more.
I wanted a better rifle, so I bought one.
Not trashing Ruger at all, they hit the nail on the head with their market.
edit - the single set trigger of the CZ is magnificent.

[excess650]

I've owned a CZ-527 in 7.62x39 for 5+ years and its a tack driver with my cast bullet loads. The fact that I already have this 527 is THE reason that I've not pursued ANY boltgun in 300BLK. The trigger on mine adjusted well enough that I never use the set trigger. Its flyweight, blued steel and walnut, so suits my old school preferences. Had it been available in 300BLK when I bought it, I might have opted for 300BLK.

Things I don't like about the RARR include the integral trigger guard, recoil lugs IN the stock rather than on the action, and the fact that the factory mag locks into the stock rather than the action. The new version of the RARR takes "AR like" 10 round magazines, so may be an improvement. I'm still not a fan of tupperware stocks....

Ruger's Scout chambered in 300BLK would be ridiculously heavy.