CZ 455 vs Savage Bmag Range Report

Dixiedog1

Dixiedog1

Active member
Well I broke the CZ 455 American combo in today and brought my Savage Bmag along for the comparison. I ran 2 soaked patches and 3 dry patches through each rifle before the test started and fired 5 fouling shots out of the Bmag and 10 out of the CZ (Due to the Winchester ammo performing so poorly) I ran a dollar bill between the barrel/stock on each rifle....the CZ has no contact...the Bmag has contact approx 8" back in the channel but again this was an out of the box test so I haven't touched it. Neither gun had any trigger adjustments...the only modification from stock was the scopes were added to each of them.

The CZ impression was a little mixed, the ammunition doesn't like feeding from the mag....the front is tipped too high...slight down pressure on the front and the ammo will feed. Not a deal breaker as I'm sure I can fix it but this was an out of the box test for each gun...no work at all. I also found the trigger to have a whisker of creep and it's a bit heavier than the Savage Bmag. The first ammunition I tried was Winchester .17HMR 17 gr 2550 fps (red box) and it shot poorly with groups consistently in the 1.4-1.6 range. Luckily I had a box of Hornady .17 HMR 17 gr 2550 ammo and that shot well. Overall the CZ shot nice and although the action wasn't as smooth as the Savage it was very functional with exception of the ammo feeding nose high from the magazine

Here's the target of six 5 shot groups at 100 yards





The Savage Bmag action operates smooth, the only fault I would say about the Bmag is that the bolt cams over firm but given that the .17 WSM needs such a hard strike I don't hold that against it. I'm not a fan of the blades in the middle of the trigger on the Accu Trigger but the trigger itself felt far better than the trigger on the CZ. They were nearly identical on creep (after blade safety takeup was complete) but the Savage was far lighter out of the box.

Here's the target of six 5 shot groups at 100 yards




The documented group size was after subtracting .17 from caliper measurement.



A friend that was with me today shot these 5 shot groups in each of these bulls...one with each rifle..he shot far better with the Savage Bmag...probably helped by the better trigger






I think the CZ .17 HMR is going to be a great shooter, it did seem to shoot consistently better groups with Hornady ammunition than the Bmag did....with Winchester ammunition the Bmag was far more accurate. The nice part about the 17 HMR is that there are more available ammunition choices out there so you can find ones that do shoot better. I'm excited to try some of the Hornady .17 WSM ammunition when it hits the shelf.


I'm sure there are a million ways this comparison is all wrong but it's my opinion and results of me behind the trigger on each rifle. It's possible someone else could shoot groups 1/4 the size of these with either rifle...who knows. I like both rifles and will likely play with each of them a bit and see if I can take a little off the groups on each of them.
 
20 grain in the WSM....I have several boxes of each but the 20 gr was closest to the 17 gr bullets in the HMR. I tried to do as apples to apples as I could on this comparison
 
not taking anything away from what you did and its a interesting test but 17wsm compared to 17hmr is a rotten apple comparasion at best. heck try the 25gr ammo. for a accuracy comparasion beteen the 20 and 25gr wsm bullets if nothing else. might as well?
 
When you get done with this I've got a Savage in 243 and a Remington in 6X284 I'd like to send you for testing.

Sorry but two different manufacturers and two different rounds???????
I just don't see the point.
 
Last edited:
I also have a couple to test also. I have a 6x45 upper with a black hole barrel and either a r25 in 243 or a 6mmwoa to test. We can even use the same weight bullet but you won't find too much for factory ammo for the 6mmwoa. Apples to orange on ammo and apples to watermelon on the rifle.
 
It's funny how everyone says how crazy this comparison is but whenever a Savage Bmag is brought up they all say it's a piece of crap and buy a CZ rimfire instead because they are so much better. Guess the apple is only rotten when it's a completely unbiased comparison from somebody not sipping Koolaid from the correct pitcher.


I heard a ton of people knocking the Bmag and in the next breath saying the CZ rimfires were far better and in a whole different league. I decided if they had that much of a following I would pony up the cash and try one.....at that time I figured I might as well compare bone stock out of the box rifles to see how the stacked up against each other. A 100 yard test is well within the capable distance of either round, they are both magazine fed bolt action rifles, they are shooting very similar projectiles, both are fast little rimfires with the same intended use of small predators. Are they identical...obviously not but can somebody glance at this report and use the info to help them decide if the CZ is worth the extra $$ or should they go with the cheaper more powerful Savage Bmag. It's just a range report of two very similar rifles at a entry level and mid level price point to give folks a little info to compare.
 
Good report & I understood from the start this was not a side by side test, just a comparison of the gun and how they shoot for you.
 
Originally Posted By: Dixiedog1 Guess the apple is only rotten when it's a completely unbiased comparison from somebody not sipping Koolaid from the correct pitcher.


I don't see it as "completely unbiased". You've clearly been looking for a reason not to like the CZ before you even laid hands on it.

Tell ya what,,,, get a national magazine to take you serious and publish your "scientific comparison" and then we'll talk.

On the other hand,,, if you're just looking to convince the "Koolaid drinkers" that the Bfag is anything more than just more plastic crap from Salvage,,,, we're not impressed.


The 17HH is still alive because CZ and Ruger are chambering rifles for that cartrige.
The WSM is dying because only Savage took it up, and even then, the roll out was on par with Obama Care.

 
Originally Posted By: RePeteOriginally Posted By: Dixiedog1 Guess the apple is only rotten when it's a completely unbiased comparison from somebody not sipping Koolaid from the correct pitcher.


I don't see it as "completely unbiased". You've clearly been looking for a reason not to like the CZ before you even laid hands on it.

Tell ya what,,,, get a national magazine to take you serious and publish your "scientific comparison" and then we'll talk.

On the other hand,,, if you're just looking to convince the "Koolaid drinkers" that the Bfag is anything more than just more plastic crap from Salvage,,,, we're not impressed.


The 17HH is still alive because CZ and Ruger are chambering rifles for that cartrige.
The WSM is dying because only Savage took it up, and even then, the roll out was on par with Obama Care.




No I didn't have a bias toward the Savage...I did have high expectations for the CZ mainly because I had heard how much better quality they were than Savage or Ruger. I wouldn't invest the money into a CZ just so I could dislike it.


As for the WSM dying out I think you are mistaken, I believe the timing of the launch was poor but the cartridge will gain popularity as the capacity to manufacture is there.


I am also not trying to convince any of the Koolaid guys that the Bmag is anything different than the crap they say it is....I'm offering my unbiased opinion to help those who are looking for the information something they can use. Ignorance and narrow mindedness are two things that are very unlikely to ever change. It's certainly not my desire or responsibility to even try. Everybody can shoot what they like and buy whatever tickles their fancy...that's a great thing about the US.

Which national publication do you write for?
 
I'm always interested in accuracy testing reports, so thanks for taking the time to do that.

The "comparison test" doesn't mean much to me considering the different calibers and bullets.
 
Originally Posted By: Eric_MayerWhen did you purchase the 17WSM ammunition and could you supply me with the lot #?

Thanks.

Eric

I purchased it approx 8 months ago...lot number is 2GG32
 
If you PM me an address, I'll ship you a box of 20 grain 17WSM from a more recent lot. I'd be interested to see if you see any improvement.

Eric
cool.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Eric_MayerIf you PM me an address, I'll ship you a box of 20 grain 17WSM from a more recent lot. I'd be interested to see if you see any improvement.

Eric
cool.gif



PM Sent
 
the bmag is so hit and miss. the one you have looks like it shoots decent. the one i have dont. the one my friend has does. the one his friend has dont. on and on. most guys on rim fire central say theirs dont. some do. very few do. you got lucky. buy a lottery ticket.lol

you now have a cz 17hmr. you have a savage 17hmr to compare it to? apple to apple and all that.
 
DiRTY DOG said:
I'm always interested in accuracy testing reports, so thanks for taking the time to do that.

The "comparison test" doesn't mean much to me considering the different calibers and bullets. [/quote.

I 2nd that.
Click to expand...
 
I think the wsm cartridge is only subject to dying because other companies don't have the balls to go out on a limb like savage, they would have to make a lot of changes to one of their current production rifles to produce it. Or spend the money to completely design one of their own. I'm not a savage fan boy at all and do think that the rifle design is cheap, but I do give them credit for having some balls to test the market with new things. If other manufacturers would make these like ruger, cz, browning or savage would make a lot nicer version, [beeep] I might even give one a shot depending on ammo availability..
 
Back
Top