Well, not too long ago I won a nice CZ 527 American .22 Hornet on GB. Was delighted when I got it until I bore scoped it and if you remember the barrel was SHOT.... rusted and pitted severely. Luckily the seller took it back. Well, I really liked the gun so much that I kept my eyes open for another. They say things happen for a reason, well, I did find another and this one is even better than the first, it has even nicer wood. This one dates 2010 per number stamping. (trick another RFC member advised me how to do) I just picked it up last night from my FFL dealer so did not have a chance to bore scope it yet... which I will definitely do today. Keeping my fingers crossed. It came with rings but they look like they possibly might be too high, but time will tell. Including a couple of pics. Will also advise on barrel condition prolly later today and then a couple more pics once she is scoped. Just lover my .22 Hornets..... this is the 5th.
![Image]()
-
Whether you're a greenhorn or a seasoned veteran, your collection's next piece is at Bass Pro Shops. Shop Now.
Rimfireraptor
CZ 527 American .22 Hornet (show n' tell)
Well, not too long ago I won a nice CZ 527 American .22 Hornet on GB. Was delighted when I got it until I bore scoped it and if you remember the barrel was SHOT.... rusted and pitted severely. Luckily the seller took it back. Well, I really liked the gun so much that I kept my eyes open for another. They say things happen for a reason, well, I did find another and this one is even better than the first, it has even nicer wood. This one dates 2010 per number stamping. (trick another RFC member advised me how to do) I just picked it up last night from my FFL dealer so did not have a chance to bore scope it yet... which I will definitely do today. Keeping my fingers crossed. It came with rings but they look like they possibly might be too high, but time will tell. Including a couple of pics. Will also advise on barrel condition prolly later today and then a couple more pics once she is scoped. Just lover my .22 Hornets..... this is the 5th.
![Image]()
To refresh everyones memory..... I got a CZ 527 .22 Hornet about a month or so ago and it had a severely pitted barrel and had to be returned to the GB seller, thank heaven they took it back. I loved the gun so much that I just had to find another. Well, a week or so ago I found another 527 in 22 Hornet (pictured here) and it had even nicer wood and I won the bid and was very excited. Needless to say I was reluctant and nervous to bore scope it worrying I would have another one with a junk pitted barrel. After having it a day i broke out the Teslong bore scope.... cleaned the gun thoroughly and did the test. You cannot believe how I felt when I found that this one too had a severely pitted barrel. (I added just some of the pics, not all) I feel like a zombie right now. So...... now I am totally confused about what is happening so I have put together a few questions which I would like to run by everyone because I am now totally lost.
1 - Is this more common than I ever imagined it could be OR am I just extremely unlucky ?
2- What portion of the members on RFC bore scope their guns after receiving them and experience this ?
(ie... maybe guns are coming thru like this but guys who don't scope just don't know they have this issue) ?
3 - Once again I called seller and they will take it back but I loose about $90 to 100 on FFL charges and return shipping.
4 - What in the he_L are people doing to their guns to have this happen ????????
The pitting on this one is bad but not quite as bad as the first. I could EASILY feel the roughness sliding the bore scope down the barrel when it hit the worst area and if I can feel the roughness I am sure the thin jacketed Hornet bullet wouldn't be happy. The worst pitting was just at the beginning of the forearm checking for about a 2" stretch, however some pitting on just off chamber as you can see in the pics. The barrel was fine to muzzle after that 2" section of bad pitting.
And you can't win in this situation.... if you keep it and it shoots bad you blame the barrel..... if it shoots decent you can only imagine it would shoot better if...... if it shoot really well you obviously would say to yourself that it would be a tack driver if you had a prestine barrel..... I could not sleep at night knowing my barrel looked like that, I would never be happy.
Most sellers stipulate "barrel is shinny"..... that doesn't mean diddly as you really have to look carefully to see the pitting and without bore scoping your assessment of true barrel condition is vague. After this gun was cleaned thoroughly you could easily see the pitting with the naked eye, without the bore scope.
I have to admit...... l'm really "gun shy" now about buying another 527 as I'm O for 2.
Anyone out there with a new in box 527 Hornet or close too that wishes to sell that needs money give me a shout.
Attachments
Just thoughts.
Those don't look like rust pitting; I think they were in there when new. CZs bore often display these 'pits'. My thoughts is that they were defects in the steel barrel, then since CZ used button cold forging to make the rifling, the defects are compressed and 'rolled' into the barrel surface. That gives them that 'unique' look.
But, that said, I don't care what a barrel looks like on the inside. HOW DOES IT SHOOT? that is all that matters.
I've shot lots of ugly barrels that were tack drivers.
Just my thoughts
Those don't look like rust pitting; I think they were in there when new. CZs bore often display these 'pits'. My thoughts is that they were defects in the steel barrel, then since CZ used button cold forging to make the rifling, the defects are compressed and 'rolled' into the barrel surface. That gives them that 'unique' look.
But, that said, I don't care what a barrel looks like on the inside. HOW DOES IT SHOOT? that is all that matters.
I've shot lots of ugly barrels that were tack drivers.
Just my thoughts
Well, first and foremost, I think you are incredibly unlucky. Still, I also think there are more CZ barrels (and other makes) like this out there than ever get reported, because 1) they shoot and 2) the owners never bore scope them, as you indicated. FWIW, James Calhoon once told me that he thought almost all the CZ barrels were "crap" based on his 100s of inspections over the years, but he also doesn't really explain what he means by "crap" and, of course, is in the business of re-barreling, so take that with a healthy dose of salt.
On the .22 Hornets I have re-barreled, a standard grade Douglas or Shilen will usually outshoot the factory barrels, but not as certainly as one might expect. I put a Shilen on this Ruger #1, using a tight chamber and every accuracy-enhancing trick in the book, but, so far, barely 1" groups at 100 yards, most more like 1.5". Makes me think I should have figured a way to shoot it before putting all that work into the 1/4 rib, express sights, barrel band sling stud, banded front sight ramp, and Talley rings. Like many No. 1s, though, it could be a fore stock issue :
![Image]()
![Image]()
In the end, the only way to ensure you don't get a "crap" barrel is to buy several match-grade barrels from the usual suspects and select them based on bore scoping and slugging. Even then, the one that scopes and slugs best may not shoot best for reasons we may never know, but your odds of getting superior accuracy are much better than relying on luck of the draw on a factory barrel. This is what BR shooters do, hand select from a lot of barrels. I also know someone here who has gone through dozens of 52s looking for the most accurate and finally found it, but most cannot afford to do that.
I'm glad the seller will be taking it back...but it would be really interesting to know how it shoots before you send it back
On the .22 Hornets I have re-barreled, a standard grade Douglas or Shilen will usually outshoot the factory barrels, but not as certainly as one might expect. I put a Shilen on this Ruger #1, using a tight chamber and every accuracy-enhancing trick in the book, but, so far, barely 1" groups at 100 yards, most more like 1.5". Makes me think I should have figured a way to shoot it before putting all that work into the 1/4 rib, express sights, barrel band sling stud, banded front sight ramp, and Talley rings. Like many No. 1s, though, it could be a fore stock issue :
In the end, the only way to ensure you don't get a "crap" barrel is to buy several match-grade barrels from the usual suspects and select them based on bore scoping and slugging. Even then, the one that scopes and slugs best may not shoot best for reasons we may never know, but your odds of getting superior accuracy are much better than relying on luck of the draw on a factory barrel. This is what BR shooters do, hand select from a lot of barrels. I also know someone here who has gone through dozens of 52s looking for the most accurate and finally found it, but most cannot afford to do that.
I'm glad the seller will be taking it back...but it would be really interesting to know how it shoots before you send it back
Post #4 ^^^^^^^^^^^
And have you even cleaned the barrel yet? That could just be some carbon in there.
Clean it, THEN bore scope it. Sometimes borescopes are your worst enemy.
And have you even cleaned the barrel yet? That could just be some carbon in there.
Clean it, THEN bore scope it. Sometimes borescopes are your worst enemy.
Well I have read all the replys so far and things are "as clear as mud".....
I found PABear's #4 post VERY INTERESTING till I read JDhasting & gmd1950 speak of "owning many of these moldels and never seening this". I assume they are bore scoping their guns. You state "CZ's often display these pits" !!!!!!!
Where are you getting the proof of this ? Have you experienced it 1st hand or word of mouth ? Someone stated on my last thread about my 1st pitted 527 I got about 2 months ago that he got a brand new gun that had that which blew me away..... what that you ? Does ANYONE think I am jumping the gun and should keep this gun ? I have many guns lots older than this with perfect barrels but all are .22's. Remember...... while bore scoping I could EASILY feel the roughness / grinding at the tip of the scope as it rode over the pitting.... call me crazy but I'm finding it hard to believe this gun will be a tack driver with that happening.
post 6# Papow comment..... again interesting but I did run about 6 patches thru with Shooters Choice and they started out pretty black/dirty but last was reasonabaly close to clean. The last 527 I had a month ago I had some fine lapping compound and lapped the barrel about 150 strokes and it didn't touch it.... so I imagine this would be the same. It's funny how the last 2/3rds or so of the bbl is clean (shiny as it should look) , just like the other one was, it's just that first 8 to 10 inches. This one has that 2" heavy spot about where the forend checking starts if that means anything. The previous 527 was about the first 1/3 of the bbl then great after that. I don't know but I guessing that these guns were shot then left somewhere for a long period of time where the powder fouling had enough moisture that it did what it did, but hard to believe that it didn't effect that last 1/2 or 2/3's or the barrel (head scratcher). I would imagine it would have done it their maybe just less, but barrel is fine from 1/2 or so to muzzle. If it wasn't for the fact that JDhasting & gmd1950 have never see it with so many rifles they have owned I would try to shoot it or a severe cleaning but I think I would be wasting my time. .... and remember.... the last one you could see copper fowling embedded into those pits which is a real no no
in the target world. I really would like to keep the gun but by the time I rebarrel with a quality piece I would have more into it than if I just bought a new one.
Just for shmit's and giggles I'll run some wire bushes down the bore, then patches of Sweets (copper) and clean the daylights out of her just to see if ANYTHING changes but I doubt it very very much. Now...... if after that I look at the barrel and she's super clean, super shiny I'm going to send Papow a big fruit basket.
I found PABear's #4 post VERY INTERESTING till I read JDhasting & gmd1950 speak of "owning many of these moldels and never seening this". I assume they are bore scoping their guns. You state "CZ's often display these pits" !!!!!!!
Where are you getting the proof of this ? Have you experienced it 1st hand or word of mouth ? Someone stated on my last thread about my 1st pitted 527 I got about 2 months ago that he got a brand new gun that had that which blew me away..... what that you ? Does ANYONE think I am jumping the gun and should keep this gun ? I have many guns lots older than this with perfect barrels but all are .22's. Remember...... while bore scoping I could EASILY feel the roughness / grinding at the tip of the scope as it rode over the pitting.... call me crazy but I'm finding it hard to believe this gun will be a tack driver with that happening.
post 6# Papow comment..... again interesting but I did run about 6 patches thru with Shooters Choice and they started out pretty black/dirty but last was reasonabaly close to clean. The last 527 I had a month ago I had some fine lapping compound and lapped the barrel about 150 strokes and it didn't touch it.... so I imagine this would be the same. It's funny how the last 2/3rds or so of the bbl is clean (shiny as it should look) , just like the other one was, it's just that first 8 to 10 inches. This one has that 2" heavy spot about where the forend checking starts if that means anything. The previous 527 was about the first 1/3 of the bbl then great after that. I don't know but I guessing that these guns were shot then left somewhere for a long period of time where the powder fouling had enough moisture that it did what it did, but hard to believe that it didn't effect that last 1/2 or 2/3's or the barrel (head scratcher). I would imagine it would have done it their maybe just less, but barrel is fine from 1/2 or so to muzzle. If it wasn't for the fact that JDhasting & gmd1950 have never see it with so many rifles they have owned I would try to shoot it or a severe cleaning but I think I would be wasting my time. .... and remember.... the last one you could see copper fowling embedded into those pits which is a real no no
in the target world. I really would like to keep the gun but by the time I rebarrel with a quality piece I would have more into it than if I just bought a new one.
Just for shmit's and giggles I'll run some wire bushes down the bore, then patches of Sweets (copper) and clean the daylights out of her just to see if ANYTHING changes but I doubt it very very much. Now...... if after that I look at the barrel and she's super clean, super shiny I'm going to send Papow a big fruit basket.
I have a hard time understanding the bore scope images and I never look at a new/used gun. I clean it and shoot it. The bore scope stay in the box until I have a problem. Then I am trying to see fouling or defects. And 'trying' is the operative word. I am not saying the OP is doing anything wrong by looking first. But he asked this question in his 2nd post.
yes. I would have cleaned and shot the gun. Even in this case where the initial patches came out black. I might have missed it, but I don't think the OP did any shooting at all! Its hard to get my sympathy without some poor targets. And he has two identical guns to shoot side by side. What are we waiting for? Lapping? Do that after.
yes. I would have cleaned and shot the gun. Even in this case where the initial patches came out black. I might have missed it, but I don't think the OP did any shooting at all! Its hard to get my sympathy without some poor targets. And he has two identical guns to shoot side by side. What are we waiting for? Lapping? Do that after.
There's nothing more misleading than a bore scope. I've often stated that they shouldn't be sold to the general public. Clearly the images they produce have no bearing on how well a barrel will shoot, and a very high percentage of the time, all the images actually affect are the mental health of the gun owner and cause him/her many sleepless nights. I own somewhere around 50-55 rimfire guns, the vast vast majority are used and close to my age (65). I've never bore scoped any of them and never will. What the bore looks like means absolutely nothing to me.
I didn't see where the OP took time to actually shoot the gun. I would shoot it, cause at the end of the day, that's all that matters. To me anyway.
I didn't see where the OP took time to actually shoot the gun. I would shoot it, cause at the end of the day, that's all that matters. To me anyway.
Can very rough looking barrels shoot well? Absolutely. As a guy who has shot 22-250 for five decades and doesn’t replace a barrel that is still shooting well until it quits, they shot very, very well right up until the end and the damage could be seen with a naked eye and felt when running a rod through it. They generally are a chore to clean and need to be cleaned more and more frequently as they get worse.
I‘ve sectioned those barrels and looked at them out of curiosity and it amazes me how a bullet could make it intact through that mess. Regarding our CZs, factory barrels have been easy to clean and just don‘t foul much either. I have them in 17&22 Hornet and 204 Ruger and have had them in 223. I like them just fine.
I have a Chinese bore scope, don‘t know that I have ever stuck it in a CZ barrel. It’s good for diagnostic work on a sick gun sometimes.
I‘ve sectioned those barrels and looked at them out of curiosity and it amazes me how a bullet could make it intact through that mess. Regarding our CZs, factory barrels have been easy to clean and just don‘t foul much either. I have them in 17&22 Hornet and 204 Ruger and have had them in 223. I like them just fine.
I have a Chinese bore scope, don‘t know that I have ever stuck it in a CZ barrel. It’s good for diagnostic work on a sick gun sometimes.
OP wants a baseline before cleaning & shooting it? Sorry, that is a very bad practice of doing things. I don`t care what the barrel looks like before i clean it, i care more what it looks like AFTER i`ve cleaned it. THEN, i would check the bore with the bore scope to make sure the barrel is in good condition to actually shoot the gun. How can you know if you have a bad or unsafe barrel if you didn`t clean it first. There could be hidden unsafe things going on without you knowing it unless you clean it and give it a thorough inspection.
I would like to see a few cleaning patches after they come out of the barrel just the way the gun was received. Then after a good brushing and solvent are used, i`d like to see the cleaning patches. When its done, i`d like to see what the bore looks like after the proper cleaning with your bore scope.
Once that is accomplished, lets see some ammo tests at 50 & 100yds. Specify the ammo used, and how many rounds were used to acclimate the ammo to the barrel. Show us the bench and the rifle rest used during range time.
I would like to see a few cleaning patches after they come out of the barrel just the way the gun was received. Then after a good brushing and solvent are used, i`d like to see the cleaning patches. When its done, i`d like to see what the bore looks like after the proper cleaning with your bore scope.
Once that is accomplished, lets see some ammo tests at 50 & 100yds. Specify the ammo used, and how many rounds were used to acclimate the ammo to the barrel. Show us the bench and the rifle rest used during range time.
Could you elaborate on Cabela’s being a lemon dumping ground? I would think GB or GI would be more of a dumping ground, since most sellers do not offer an inspection period, and one can freely examine a rifle at Cabela’s.
I understand one probably shouldn’t condemn a rifle barrel from bore scope inspection alone, as it is usually worth giving a barrel a chance since one already has the rifle in hand, but let’s not kid ourselves, there’s no way the inside of a new barrel should look like that from the factory. And the OP said he did clean it. IF CZ had used a bore scope for final inspection, I doubt either of the OP’s barrels would have passed. He has a legitimate gripe, even without the bore scope, given the roughness encountered with even a simple cleaning rod and patch after cleaning. And he’s free to do any before and after testing he likes. Why bust his chops about methodology? He’s a victim here, and I doubt anyone here would be happy with barrels that look like that inside. It’s very fortunate the sellers are allowing him to return the two rifles.
I understand one probably shouldn’t condemn a rifle barrel from bore scope inspection alone, as it is usually worth giving a barrel a chance since one already has the rifle in hand, but let’s not kid ourselves, there’s no way the inside of a new barrel should look like that from the factory. And the OP said he did clean it. IF CZ had used a bore scope for final inspection, I doubt either of the OP’s barrels would have passed. He has a legitimate gripe, even without the bore scope, given the roughness encountered with even a simple cleaning rod and patch after cleaning. And he’s free to do any before and after testing he likes. Why bust his chops about methodology? He’s a victim here, and I doubt anyone here would be happy with barrels that look like that inside. It’s very fortunate the sellers are allowing him to return the two rifles.
I have and use a Hawkeye and Teslong bore scopes and find them a handy tool. Never had one drag in a barrel. Can't image one that bad.
There is a rabbit hole option with a CZ 527 in .22 Hornet especially with a bad barrel. Send the gun to James Calhoon and have him barrel the gun to .19 Badger. Easy conversion when the gun is a Hornet. I had Calhoon build one and it is very accurate and superior to the Hornet. But you won't walk into a Gunshop and buy ammo. Neat cartridge though.
Or just rebarrel with Hornet and not look back. Hard to beat the CZ 527 with small calibers.
Good luck.
There is a rabbit hole option with a CZ 527 in .22 Hornet especially with a bad barrel. Send the gun to James Calhoon and have him barrel the gun to .19 Badger. Easy conversion when the gun is a Hornet. I had Calhoon build one and it is very accurate and superior to the Hornet. But you won't walk into a Gunshop and buy ammo. Neat cartridge though.
Or just rebarrel with Hornet and not look back. Hard to beat the CZ 527 with small calibers.
Good luck.
Just to be more clear, the Cabela’s question was regarding the likelihood of people, not CZ or any other maker, dumping lemon used rifles.
My statement regarding CZ was meant to be a hypothetical emphasizing the poor condition of a bore, not infer CZ incompetence. I personally doubt those barrels left CZ in that condition. To restate, IF CZ had known a new rifle bore looked like the OP’s, they would not have passed it, not CZ should have caught something like that.
I have owned plenty of CZs and never had a bad bore in any of them. Again, emphasizing the OP’s bad fortune and legitimate complaint, not CZ QC.
Taking the opportunity to slam Cabela’s, a common occurrence here, when it has no connection whatsoever to this situation, and then telling the OP he’s wrong to use a bore scope and wrong to base decisions on bore inspection is the stretch.
My statement regarding CZ was meant to be a hypothetical emphasizing the poor condition of a bore, not infer CZ incompetence. I personally doubt those barrels left CZ in that condition. To restate, IF CZ had known a new rifle bore looked like the OP’s, they would not have passed it, not CZ should have caught something like that.
I have owned plenty of CZs and never had a bad bore in any of them. Again, emphasizing the OP’s bad fortune and legitimate complaint, not CZ QC.
Taking the opportunity to slam Cabela’s, a common occurrence here, when it has no connection whatsoever to this situation, and then telling the OP he’s wrong to use a bore scope and wrong to base decisions on bore inspection is the stretch.
I have had SEVERAL members here state "you should/must shoot the gun" to give it the true assessment as to whether the pitting/rusting is causing an issue and the gun is "worthy" of keeping and to disregard the bore scope findings, let the gun do the "talking". Now.... if I'm a farmer and just shoot woodchucks out to 150 yards I feel your philosophy will work but for a benchrest shooter that is looking for dime size groups at 100 yards here is the scenario you are painting:
If I take the gun out and it shoots 1 1/4" groups do I blame the barrel and send it back ?
If I take the gun out and it shoots 1" groups do I say, not too bad but gun is compromised by bbl and return ?
If I take the gun out and it shoots 3/4" groups do I give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down ?
If I take the gun out and it shoots 1/2" groups do I give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down ?
Point is.... as a benchrest shooter you will AWAYS be haunted by the "what if" the barrel was perfect.
Shooting it proves absolutely NOTHING as that 3/4" might have been a 5/8", that 1/2" might have been a 3/8" and so on...
plus as you know the Hornet can be finicky as far as which load it likes so you are spending a lot of time and jumping through a whole bunch of hoops to try to prove what ???? if the pitted barrel is worthy ???
Fact: The gun WILL be compromised by that pitted barrel. How much..... only god knows but for a benchrest shooter you don't start out with a compromised barrel and try to make it work.
I forgot to mention in last post.... TBR stated that James Calhoon stated "James Calhoon once told me that he thought almost all the CZ barrels were "crap" based on his 100s of inspections over the years". That raised my eyebrows as I think it's a fair statement to say that for the most part everyone agrees that CZ's make a very accurate rifle and the barrel is first and foremost in accuracy so for him to say that has me really scratching my head.
Papow: I am going to give that gun a SERIOUS scrubing with a wire brush, solvents, Sweets, and rescope to help evaluate the situation.
and stop Papo
If I take the gun out and it shoots 1 1/4" groups do I blame the barrel and send it back ?
If I take the gun out and it shoots 1" groups do I say, not too bad but gun is compromised by bbl and return ?
If I take the gun out and it shoots 3/4" groups do I give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down ?
If I take the gun out and it shoots 1/2" groups do I give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down ?
Point is.... as a benchrest shooter you will AWAYS be haunted by the "what if" the barrel was perfect.
Shooting it proves absolutely NOTHING as that 3/4" might have been a 5/8", that 1/2" might have been a 3/8" and so on...
plus as you know the Hornet can be finicky as far as which load it likes so you are spending a lot of time and jumping through a whole bunch of hoops to try to prove what ???? if the pitted barrel is worthy ???
Fact: The gun WILL be compromised by that pitted barrel. How much..... only god knows but for a benchrest shooter you don't start out with a compromised barrel and try to make it work.
I forgot to mention in last post.... TBR stated that James Calhoon stated "James Calhoon once told me that he thought almost all the CZ barrels were "crap" based on his 100s of inspections over the years". That raised my eyebrows as I think it's a fair statement to say that for the most part everyone agrees that CZ's make a very accurate rifle and the barrel is first and foremost in accuracy so for him to say that has me really scratching my head.
Papow: I am going to give that gun a SERIOUS scrubing with a wire brush, solvents, Sweets, and rescope to help evaluate the situation.
and stop Papo
Like I said, James Calhoon is in the business of selling barrels and re-barreling rifles, so you have to take anything he says with a grain of salt. If they didn't think their barrels were better, custom barrel makers wouldn't be in the business. It's just that the reality is a custom barrel does not always improve accuracy. Most seasoned RFC members can attest to this.
As I mentioned in previous posts, and as Pepper51 reaffirms, the Calhoon conversions do have a great reputation, as do his .19 wildcats. They are great options if one is willing to go with something other than the factory options. I've not owned a .19 Calhoon (the Hornet-based wildcat) but I have owned and shot a couple of .20 Vartarg rifles (.204 Fireball), and I agree that the .20s do very effectively combine the best of .22 and .17 performance.
As I mentioned in previous posts, and as Pepper51 reaffirms, the Calhoon conversions do have a great reputation, as do his .19 wildcats. They are great options if one is willing to go with something other than the factory options. I've not owned a .19 Calhoon (the Hornet-based wildcat) but I have owned and shot a couple of .20 Vartarg rifles (.204 Fireball), and I agree that the .20s do very effectively combine the best of .22 and .17 performance.
I have a .204 Ruger that despises 40gr bullets and that's all I've found locally, I reallty want to try the lighter bullet weighjt as many CZ shooter say they shoot best, even with less than stellar accuracy they get to the target like NOW...it has the 3 shot mag adaptation which does not feed well at least in my rifle.
![Image]()
![Image]()
![Image]()
“… the .20s do very effectively combine the best of .22 and .17 performance.”
Sounds like what Labradoodles were being advertised as. Let’s just say (and in the case of the four legged examples, I’m being extremely charitable) that I’ve never seen either work out as well in theory as they sounded in practice. I’ve had a 204 for two decades and it is fine, but as far as supplanting 17 and 22 calibers, it doesn’t come close to being as good as either when I really need what they have to offer. It gives you quite a bit of what they have to offer, and is possibly a good choice if you want a versatile single caliber, but it doesn’t even come within striking distance of offering up the best of what the others actually deliver.
Sounds like what Labradoodles were being advertised as. Let’s just say (and in the case of the four legged examples, I’m being extremely charitable) that I’ve never seen either work out as well in theory as they sounded in practice. I’ve had a 204 for two decades and it is fine, but as far as supplanting 17 and 22 calibers, it doesn’t come close to being as good as either when I really need what they have to offer. It gives you quite a bit of what they have to offer, and is possibly a good choice if you want a versatile single caliber, but it doesn’t even come within striking distance of offering up the best of what the others actually deliver.
It's been mentioned in a couple of posts that this barrel didn't leave the CZ factory in this condition. So, what combination of cartridges and lack of care can create that damage? I've seen some rusted bores from guns left out in barns and washhouses etc. and most had some pitting but not really any roughness after they were cleaned and shot again. This damage isn't from the barrel boring equipment and the quality of the steel?
I have to admit, I am shocked that no one hear hasn't been able to diagnose the specific problem. With all the shooters I was confident that someone would have known or been able to decipher the problem. Like it someone might have purchased a CZ new, shot it a fair amount, did not clean it then just put it in the cellar or closet for a very very long time and when they took it back out this is what they found.... something like this scenario. Then we would have the answer...
There are a few constants / clues which I thought would have helped lead to the answer.
1 - I had two CZ 527 .22 Hornets that I bought off of GB in the last 2 months and both had the exact same issue, to the letter. If you look at the pics on RFC of both guns you can easily see that they are the identical problem.
2 - The pitting/corrosion was always in the 1st half the barrel, 2nd half was clean & shiny ??
3 - the exteriors on both guns were perfect
4 - I realize that this is a long shot but, both were CZ 527 .22 Hornets. (probably means nothing but it is a data point)
(ie.... bad batch of barrels or metallurgy) It's a long shot but you have to include it.
Reading fourbores post..... I too was thinking corrosive primers or powder but I would assume the whole barrel would have been affected and todays powders for the most part are not corrosive like blackpowder. One of the earlier posts a gent stated he didn't think it looked like your typical rust..... it's crusty black and you can see in some pics "spider webbing" whatever that means.
I had a thought..... since we (RFC) have not yet determined what caused this problem I was thinking possibly posting to another gun website and we might get lucky and someone knows what the issue is ? If so, what other gun/shooting/benchrest gun blogs are out there ? I really would like to get to the bottom of this.
There are a few constants / clues which I thought would have helped lead to the answer.
1 - I had two CZ 527 .22 Hornets that I bought off of GB in the last 2 months and both had the exact same issue, to the letter. If you look at the pics on RFC of both guns you can easily see that they are the identical problem.
2 - The pitting/corrosion was always in the 1st half the barrel, 2nd half was clean & shiny ??
3 - the exteriors on both guns were perfect
4 - I realize that this is a long shot but, both were CZ 527 .22 Hornets. (probably means nothing but it is a data point)
(ie.... bad batch of barrels or metallurgy) It's a long shot but you have to include it.
Reading fourbores post..... I too was thinking corrosive primers or powder but I would assume the whole barrel would have been affected and todays powders for the most part are not corrosive like blackpowder. One of the earlier posts a gent stated he didn't think it looked like your typical rust..... it's crusty black and you can see in some pics "spider webbing" whatever that means.
I had a thought..... since we (RFC) have not yet determined what caused this problem I was thinking possibly posting to another gun website and we might get lucky and someone knows what the issue is ? If so, what other gun/shooting/benchrest gun blogs are out there ? I really would like to get to the bottom of this.
I`m shocked that you expected the perfect answer here. You`ve had SEVERAL members throw ideas an thoughts out to you. Only the internet stands between us. Without actually being there in person, all you`ll find on the internet is everyone`s thoughts, ideas, and opinions.
Don't know about a blog, but you might send one of your pics to Hawkeye and see what one of their gurus thinks...although I wouldn't mention your Teslong bore scope.
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
