CZ w/AHR #3 package or CZ 550 Safari Classics Custom

[Edge]

Hi Edge, You gave me the exact info that I needed! It is very much appreciated!

Glad I could provide you some info you can use vs posters that post on thoughts and conjecture on AH forums. It took me some time to look for 300gr loads in my load books, and not surprisingly was very little to be found. Hope to have answered your questions, if not I’ll do my best. I am intrigued by this cartridge.

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

Glad I could provide you some info you can use vs posters that post on thoughts and conjecture in this forum. It took me some time to look for 300gr loads in my load books, and not surprisingly was very little to be found. Hope to have answered your questions, if not I’ll do my best. I am intrigued by this cartridge.

I have two seperate reasons for needing this info, both important. I wish it was practical for me to reload. I would really like to play around with combo load, not worried about getting them mixed. Hawk pretty much makes whatever you want. Never had a failure & Dead is Dead!

 

[Dirtdart]

I have two seperate reasons for needing this info, both important. I wish it was practical for me to reload. I would really like to play around with combo load, not worried about getting them mixed. Hawk pretty much makes whatever you want. Never had a failure & Dead is Dead!

A few years back I was trying to get a 300gr light load that would hit to the same center (but high enough to stretch the cartridge for lighter animals at a distance) as my 400gr Woodleigh solid zeroed at 50 yards in my CZ550 in ..404 Jeffery. I never did quite make that happen and because of time constraints just went with 400gr soft/solids that would dance with each other. I do not try to milk all the velocity available out of these classics so my velocities are on the conservative side. In looking back at my notes I had an average velocity of 2480fps with 85gr of Norma 203B out of my 22 inch barrel with the 300gr Hawks. 2387fps with 83grains same. Norma 203B is my preferred powder for this cartridge with 400gr and I have plenty so thats why I chose it. The July 1991 #136 issue of Rifle has a few loads for Hawk 300 & 350 grainers.
After I have Wayne address a few of the issues with this CZ550 in .404 I may pick up this project again. The 450gr bullets are proving very accurate and were not part of the experiment before. I hope this has been of some value.

 

[sgt_zim]

A few years back I was trying to get a 300gr light load that would hit to the same center (but high enough to stretch the cartridge for lighter animals at a distance) as my 400gr Woodleigh solid zeroed at 50 yards in my CZ550 in ..404 Jeffery. I never did quite make that happen and because of time constraints just went with 400gr soft/solids that would dance with each other. I do not try to milk all the velocity available out of these classics so my velocities are on the conservative side. In looking back at my notes I had an average velocity of 2480fps with 85gr of Norma 203B out of my 22 inch barrel with the 300gr Hawks. 2387fps with 83grains same. Norma 203B is my preferred powder for this cartridge with 400gr and I have plenty so thats why I chose it. The July 1991 #136 issue of Rifle has a few loads for Hawk 300 & 350 grainers.
After I have Wayne address a few of the issues with this CZ550 in .404 I may pick up this project again. The 450gr bullets are proving very accurate and were not part of the experiment before. I hope this has been of some value.

One of the things I have observed is that it doesn't really pay off very well to try and squeeze all the velocity out of a given load anyway. Every cartridge has a performance envelope, and unless you're dealing with very high B.C. and very high velocity cartridges, the upper edge of the performance envelope doesn't get you a whole lot as far as extending range. It *can* be a pretty good enhancement in energy, but if you're already north of 2 ft-tons of energy at the muzzle on the low end of velocity, seems to me all that's really being accomplished is more recoil for no appreciable gain on the business end. 4600 ft-lbs isn't going to kill an animal any deader, or any faster, than 4200 ft-lbs.

If "faster" = "more accurate," then fine. But otherwise, there just isn't a lot of reason to fool around with velocity for a given bullet for a given cartridge.

 

[Dirtdart]

One of the things I have observed is that it doesn't really pay off very well to try and squeeze all the velocity out of a given load anyway. Every cartridge has a performance envelope, and unless you're dealing with very high B.C. and very high velocity cartridges, the upper edge of the performance envelope doesn't get you a whole lot as far as extending range. It *can* be a pretty good enhancement in energy, but if you're already north of 2 ft-tons of energy at the muzzle on the low end of velocity, seems to me all that's really being accomplished is more recoil for no appreciable gain on the business end. 4600 ft-lbs isn't going to kill an animal any deader, or any faster, than 4200 ft-lbs.

If "faster" = "more accurate," then fine. But otherwise, there just isn't a lot of reason to fool around with velocity for a given bullet for a given cartridge.

I agree 100% but I really enjoy experimenting even though it may have very little practical value. I don't know if it is a hobby or an affliction? Like trying to decide do I need to keep my .404 Jeffery, .416 Rigby, .416 Remington, and .416 Taylor? My wife is convinced they are all so different that her husband "needs" then all.

 

[sgt_zim]

Sounds like your wife's husband is a terrific salesman.

 

[Shootist43]

Lon, for what it is worth I ran a QuickLoad analysis of a 300 Gr. Hawk RT .035 and H4350 Powder. Why the H4350 powder? That is what I'm using in my 404 Jeffery (the one I bought from you.) Using a slightly compressed charge i.e. 105% the data showed 2704 FPS and 4871 ft. lbs. of energy. That result was obtained by using the "expected" case and bullet data out of a 25" barrel. One would have to know the specifics of your rifle and brass to get a more precise calculation. Good and or safe practice would be to start off at 90% of that powder charge and work up to more powerful loads. Perhaps someone else can provide you with "factual" load data and ballistics.

 

[Edge]

Lon, for what it is worth I ran a QuickLoad analysis of a 300 Gr. Hawk RT .035 and H4350 Powder. Why the H4350 powder? That is what I'm using in my 404 Jeffery (the one I bought from you.) Using a slightly compressed charge i.e. 105% the data showed 2704 FPS and 4871 ft. lbs. of energy. That result was obtained by using the "expected" case and bullet data out of a 25" barrel. One would have to know the specifics of your rifle and brass to get a more precise calculation. Good and or safe practice would be to start off at 90% of that powder charge and work up to more powerful loads. Perhaps someone else can provide you with "factual" load data and ballistics.

Not to derail this thread too much, I use and have found Quickload to be pretty close to the velocity/charge weights in most of my calibers, except for my 270WSM. How has your experience been with it? My “factual” comment wasn’t directed at you Shootist43.

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

Lon, for what it is worth I ran a QuickLoad analysis of a 300 Gr. Hawk RT .035 and H4350 Powder. Why the H4350 powder? That is what I'm using in my 404 Jeffery (the one I bought from you.) Using a slightly compressed charge i.e. 105% the data showed 2704 FPS and 4871 ft. lbs. of energy. That result was obtained by using the "expected" case and bullet data out of a 25" barrel. One would have to know the specifics of your rifle and brass to get a more precise calculation. Good and or safe practice would be to start off at 90% of that powder charge and work up to more powerful loads. Perhaps someone else can provide you with "factual" load data and ballistics.

Hi, I hope the CZ is working well for you. Thanks for the info, it is really needed.

 

[Shootist43]

Edge, I was just trying to help Lon out. I was hoping that someone had data from a load that they'd worked up and had some info on. The load I worked up using QuickLoad is just all "theoretical" in my opinion until somebody actually puts it through a rifle and actually sees what it does. From Lon's comments I thought he was looking for extra range, that is why I posted the "potential" load that I did. My 404 Jeffery load with a 400 Gr Swift A Frame is 82 Gr. of H4350 for 2300 FPS. Von Gruff gave me that load as the one being most accurate in his rifle. I saw no reason to change it.

 

[Edge]

Edge, I was just trying to help Lon out. I was hoping that someone had data from a load that they'd worked up and had some info on. The load I worked up using QuickLoad is just all "theoretical" in my opinion until somebody actually puts it through a rifle and actually sees what it does. From Lon's comments I thought he was looking for extra range, that is why I posted the "potential" load that I did. My 404 Jeffery load with a 400 Gr Swift A Frame is 82 Gr. of H4350 for 2300 FPS. Von Gruff gave me that load as the one being most accurate in his rifle. I saw no reason to change it.

No worries, all good stuff! I may look into a 404 as my next rifle, if I have any funds left after a July trip to Zimbabwe.

I believe I’ve seen the load you posted above on some other sites, maybe it was from Von Gruff.

 

[Shootist43]

Sorry folks I screwed up again. The load for my 404 Jeffery is 84 Gr. of H4350 NOT 82 as originally posted.

 

[colorado]

I went a hybrid route. Bought my CZ 550 in 500 Jeffrey from the CZ Custom Shop (Harlan at Triple River did the work), then had Wayne put his CZ #1 Upgrade Package on it. It's very accurate, handles and shoots well (sub MOA). I love the gun. Would highly recommend going either path. Both Wayne and Harlan do excellent work.

 

[Hunting Hitman]

I went a hybrid route. Bought my CZ 550 in 500 Jeffrey from the CZ Custom Shop (Harlan at Triple River did the work), then had Wayne put his CZ #1 Upgrade Package on it. It's very accurate, handles and shoots well (sub MOA). I love the gun. Would highly recommend going either path. Both Wayne and Harlan do excellent work.

Was reading this thread with great interest and have a couple of questions.
1. Who or what does AHR #3 package
2. Triple River I imagine is a custom shop as well. What additional service do they do?

Thanks in advance as I’m contemplating having a 375 H & H for the wife.

 

[flat8]

Was reading this thread with great interest and have a couple of questions.
1. Who or what does AHR #3 package
2. Triple River I imagine is a custom shop as well. What additional service do they do?

Thanks in advance as I’m contemplating having a 375 H & H for the wife.

1: American Hunting Rifles. For details on the #3, follow this link.

http://americanhuntingrifles.com/upgrade-your-cz/

I just got my .375 with #3 back from Wayne and I am extremely pleased. The man does great work.

 

[leslie hetrick]

I have a two CZ 550 american,s, both are plain jane factory rifles. a 6.5x55 and a .375 H&H. after reading about feeding issues with the cz,s, I loaded 10 no powder dummies and ran them thru both rifles many times and never had any feeding or ejecting problems at all and both smoothed up quite a bit over the days I worked them. I used a cz 550 .375 on five trips to Africa and used it to shoot 90 % of the animals I shot.

 

[D.M.V]

I have a two CZ 550 american,s, both are plain jane factory rifles. a 6.5x55 and a .375 H&H. after reading about feeding issues with the cz,s, I loaded 10 no powder dummies and ran them thru both rifles many times and never had any feeding or ejecting problems at all and both smoothed up quite a bit over the days I worked them. I used a cz 550 .375 on five trips to Africa and used it to shoot 90 % of the animals I shot.

View attachment 238043

Nice rifles