Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information


Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

advice on 455 thumbhole

Options
  • 10-01-2018 3:56pm
    #1
    sniperman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,027 ✭✭✭


    hi folks,i have a cz .22 455 lr with 16"barrel black synthetic stock,would the cz thumbhole with 16"barrel be heavier for ues in the field?( like the look and fancy a change,)or are they more suited for target shooting?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    clivej
    Registered Users Posts: 7,057 ✭✭✭clivej


    sniperman wrote: »
    hi folks,i have a cz .22 455 lr with 16"barrel black synthetic stock,would the cz thumbhole with 16"barrel be heavier for ues in the field?( like the look and fancy a change,)or are they more suited for target shooting?

    Yes they would be heavier by about 1 1/2lb. They are a very nice stock I have the 455 22lr 16" barrel in the thumbhole stock. Very nice stock to shoot from and hold. The extra weight wouldn't bother me.
    I also converted an old Brno stock so that the 455 would fit in it to shoot the benchrest 'Factory Sporter' class. The 455 in the thumbhole stock was 3oz over weight.
    I also pillor bedded both stocks for the 455 action, cos it was a wet day (or three)


  • Options
    #3
    MarcinG
    Registered Users Posts: 356 ✭✭MarcinG


    I had it in 17hmr and was not quite happy overall.
    Takes bit effort to engage safety you cant just lift thumb
    Adjusting cheek weld is rather tricky as nothing i found fits over this stock.
    After adding sling 900g scope and bipod it was almost too heavy to carry and shoot of shoulder.

    Looks nice though.


  • Options
    #4
    270WIN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 213 ✭✭270WIN


    the thumbhole version is too heavy imo for hunting...it will kill you going through fields on a warm summer evening...i have the synthetic version now in 17 hmr and it is just as accurate and as light as a feather!


  • Options
    #5
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,562 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Had it in hmr (same size & weight) and while a nice rifle the lads above are spot on. It gets heavy, quickly, and off the shoulder shots can be a challenge after a bit of a walk. It's muzzle heavy (mine was 20") and the cheek weld was good enough for me but i tried other options to make it perfect and nothing worked.

    Funny thing is i had the exact same caliber just in a Savage with identical features. Same thumbhole, same length barrel, same contour, etc. and it was like a different thing altogether. However Savage build them it was lighter, better balanced and just as accurate (although it preferred the ammo the CZ wouldn't shoot). The cheek weld was better than the CZ and franly i liked the look of the Savage over the CZ (light timber with a stainless barrel compared to the CZ's dark stock and blued barrel).
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

    If you see a problem post use the report post function. Click on the three dots on the post, select "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • Options
    #6
    extremetaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭extremetaz


    My experience mirrors the above, sure they look great, but they are heavier; also just like Cass I've found them difficult to get a consistent cheek weld in field positions, and I've also found it difficult to get consistent contact with the trigger hand without using a stronger grip then I'd like, which has knock on effects for trigger pull.

    Found it great prone or off the bench, but sitting, kneeling, or standing, I just couldn't get along with it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    clawback07
    Registered Users Posts: 96 ✭✭clawback07


    extremetaz wrote: »
    My experience mirrors the above, sure they look great, but they are heavier; also just like Cass I've found them difficult to get a consistent cheek weld in field positions, and I've also found it difficult to get consistent contact with the trigger hand without using a stronger grip then I'd like, which has knock on effects for trigger pull.

    Found it great prone or off the bench, but sitting, kneeling, or standing, I just couldn't get along with it.

    I was toying with the idea of doing just this , with the very same rifle but having read the posts I'll stick with what came in the box ! It's heavy enough with a scope and a bipod .


Advertisement