CZ 457 vs Tikka T1X vs Lithgow LA101 - First .22 Rifle

[allan]

I've seen a couple of LA101 actions with machining like that - You'd think that with to-day's machinery & tooling it shouldn't happen - Poor quality control!!!!
I've had a couple of LA101's for years - Both "up-graded" a bit by Rolf Hey & deye243 has an idea of how they perform.
Every manufacturer, regardless of price point, produces a "dud" occasionally and I've been burnt a couple of times over the years.

https://imgur.com/DIrPAEG
https://imgur.com/Yz6Ahsa

[allan]

the stock is a nice piece of walnut like you see on some americans , and with a black hardwood fore end cap and grip cap added , it looks a little like a "cooper" rimfire .

bigrich....I had a quiet chuckle at that comment
The original Montana Coopers were hit and miss when it came to accuracy and performance but they certainly knew how to pick a decent piece of timber and how to dress it up.
This is my 2005 build 57M - Done when Leroy and Connie Barry worked for Dan Cooper - This couple set up a family business called Canyon Creek Gunstocks - Check out their website some time if you want to see some true craftsmanship:

https://canyoncreekgunstocks.com/display.asp?page=gunlibrary

https://imgur.com/5EnWwnw
https://imgur.com/70ql9Qn

[bigrich]

the stock is a nice piece of walnut like you see on some americans , and with a black hardwood fore end cap and grip cap added , it looks a little like a "cooper" rimfire .

bigrich....I had a quiet chuckle at that comment
The original Montana Coopers were hit and miss when it came to accuracy and performance but they certainly knew how to pick a decent piece of timber and how to dress it up.
This is my 2005 build 57M - Done when Leroy and Connie Barry worked for Dan Cooper - This couple set up a family business called Canyon Creek Gunstocks - Check out their website some time if you want to see some true craftsmanship:

https://canyoncreekgunstocks.com/display.asp?page=gunlibrary

https://imgur.com/5EnWwnw
https://imgur.com/70ql9Qn

yeah , there's some true works of art in that lot my CZ definitely doesn't look as flash as some of them , when i said a little , i meant a little
i like a nice custom rifle , but not to the point that it that expensive or too pretty to get out of the safe . my local stock guy uses roger vardy walnut . he does work for a big game rifle smith in NT . he used to do work with TSE , but the new owners cut him loose unfortunately .
back to rimfies , you'd think for the money anschutz stocks would be even a little nicer .

[bigrich]

I would poke my eyes out with Albanese's dick before I went anywhere near a 457.
Maybe a 101, if they ever come out with a timber stock that doesn't look like it is made from old Ikea bedroom furniture.

I'd love to see that sleazy would love it .
Now to my reply I had two la 101s 17 HMR and a 22 long rifle guess what I got now CZ 457 and would never go back to those other two ever it's the best 22 I've ever owned and I used to have anschutz 1517 dhb

I just liked the idea of an Aussie-made rifle and the patriotic nature of it all.
But I'm really disappointed in the junk CZ mags they decided to use, to cut corners with so they didn't have to make magazine testing a big thing.
And the weird stocks.
I love the double locking lugs on the Lithgow though.
EDIT: years ago when the rifle was first announced to be in development, the factory mentioned they were going to use the awesome 10/22 mags for their reliability and flush fit with a full 10 rounds, but that was going to cost more in the end so they went the cheaper route. Why does an Aussie company do that all the time? Turned me off.
I see the 457 for what it is and what CZ said it is... a cheapened-to-make rimfire over the quality complicated-to-machine action and bolt of the Mod 1, 2, CZ452/53 etc and went to the garden-gate bolt latch lockup of the bolt handle root. They said so themselves - they set out to make a cheaper rifle.

Now that's just my personal bias of a cheapened rifle, might as well buy a Ruger American with the same cheapened action with the bolt handle as the locking lug - except the Ruger has a far superior magazine that holds 10 rounds flush with a cast stainless set of feed lips that never bend, misfeed or stick out like a farm-ute shocky that broke off its bottom mount and rips into everything.

Here was my dynamic duo

Screenshot_20260910_133758_Gallery_copy_926x432.jpg

The 101 has a triple lug lock up here's one of mine look at the s**t machining marks in the rear face of the action .

Screenshot_20260910_133722_Gallery_copy_926x432.jpg

And the bolt

Screenshot_20260910_133732_Gallery_copy_926x432.jpg

i liked the idea of buying a aussie lithgow 101 with all the features they have , and the reputed accuracy, so i bought a brand new synthetic stock 101 in 22lr . i adjusted the torque settings of the action screws six ways from sunday, different scopes , and tried every 22lr ammo known to man including lapua centre x and that lithgow was the worst shooting rimfire i've ever come across . i didn't keep it . cz 452's , in particular the "american" model, are the standard i judge all rimfires by these days

[Fester]

It's hard not to get bad machining marks now days.
My smith was amazed that my CZ shot so well before it went bad; he reckoned old Clouse must have been drunk on a Friday arvo when he made my chamber.

Was a dark Turkish walnut .308 Lithgow shooting today; he loved it, and the way it shot ADI ammo.
I like the look of plywood ones better myself.

[Wapiti]

I hate the stained Beech cheepie stocks CZ used on the 452 Americans so much that I bought a semi-finished grade-5 walnut stock for it. It came from vardy apparently, and it was a one off that he never finished off.
Never fitted it, of course it's got no checkering and I always meant to get me some Dem-Bart tools to do it, but never did. I should revisit it.

I am concerned I might screw up the rifle though, as now it's got the standard bedding that looks like some beavers chewed the inletting out, and the barrel has full contact with the stock all the way up.
But the thing shoots so well, after a few Brno bullet-sprayers I've had the misfortune to buy, this CZ copy is a freak.
Best thing is this is with the old Powerpoint HV's and Subs, both 40 and 42gn. I have no use for target ammo and a rifle that shoots great with hunting ammo is worth 10 that only shoot target subs. To me anyway.

So I'm scared that I'll ruin the wood with bodgy home checkering, and by floating the barrel and Acraglassing the bedding, I'll ruin it.

[Wapiti]

It's hard not to get bad machining marks now days.
My smith was amazed that my CZ shot so well before it went bad; he reckoned old Clouse must have been drunk on a Friday arvo when he made my chamber.

Was a dark Turkish walnut .308 Lithgow shooting today; he loved it, and the way it shot ADI ammo.
I like the look of plywood ones better myself.

I've got a collection of Ruger 77/22's, two walnut stocked polished-blued .22's and a .22WMRF, a 17HMR laminated varmint, and two stainless "paddles".
To me they are the epitome of what a rimfire should be, twin-locking lugs, actions scaled down centrefire '77's, and those gorgeous BX-1 & 2 magazines that never misfeed and sit beautifully flush.
AND they easily shoot as well as my CZ with proper hunting ammo. Which is why I'm so harsh in expectations about Brno's.

I just don't get why nobody ever considers them, and to me as a metal guy, sitting those others next to one makes those look like amateurish cost-cutting. That's going to upset some blokes, but oh well.

[deye243]

It's hard not to get bad machining marks now days.
My smith was amazed that my CZ shot so well before it went bad; he reckoned old Clouse must have been drunk on a Friday arvo when he made my chamber.

Was a dark Turkish walnut .308 Lithgow shooting today; he loved it, and the way it shot ADI ammo.
I like the look of plywood ones better myself.

I've got a collection of Ruger 77/22's, two walnut stocked polished-blued .22's and a .22WMRF, a 17HMR laminated varmint, and two stainless "paddles".
To me they are the epitome of what a rimfire should be, twin-locking lugs, actions scaled down centrefire '77's, and those gorgeous BX-1 & 2 magazines that never misfeed and sit beautifully flush.
AND they easily shoot as well as my CZ with proper hunting ammo. Which is why I'm so harsh in expectations about Brno's.

I just don't get why nobody ever considers them, and to me as a metal guy, sitting those others next to one makes those look like amateurish cost-cutting. That's going to upset some blokes, but oh well.

Cost is one thing for a 22 although if I could find what I want in one I would buy in a heartbeat unfortunately I've never seen one shoot under an inch to an inch and a half or more at 50 yards and I've mucked around with quite a few very disappointing for the price of them.
Would also love one in 357 Magnum or 44 Magnum but again most of the ones I've tinkered with over the years shot about three inches to four inches at 100 yards

[bigrich]

I hate the stained Beech cheepie stocks CZ used on the 452 Americans so much that I bought a semi-finished grade-5 walnut stock for it. It came from vardy apparently, and it was a one off that he never finished off.
Never fitted it, of course it's got no checkering and I always meant to get me some Dem-Bart tools to do it, but never did. I should revisit it.

I am concerned I might screw up the rifle though, as now it's got the standard bedding that looks like some beavers chewed the inletting out, and the barrel has full contact with the stock all the way up.
But the thing shoots so well, after a few Brno bullet-sprayers I've had the misfortune to buy, this CZ copy is a freak.
Best thing is this is with the old Powerpoint HV's and Subs, both 40 and 42gn. I have no use for target ammo and a rifle that shoots great with hunting ammo is worth 10 that only shoot target subs. To me anyway.

So I'm scared that I'll ruin the wood with bodgy home checkering, and by floating the barrel and Acraglassing the bedding, I'll ruin it.

the 452 americans have the extra action screw at the rear of the receiver which lets you float the barrel , the early brno's don't . i've owned a couple of model 2's that didn't shoot great . i think the best saying i've seen was on rimfire central , "that a accurate rimfire can be a lottery at times , buying a cz452 or a anschutz just increases the odds of getting a good shooter " .
with your stock mate , we learn by doing . research and carefully thought out moves , i'm sure you'll do a good job . getting good bedding compund will help , and can fix any mistakes . my stock guy puts the greatest importance on getting the action inletting right . using something like engineers blue to get the action sitting perfect without the need for bedding on his personal rifles . on early model 2's , and other rifles for that matter , the barrel channel inletting is even as a lot of these early rifles relied on one receiver screw . my old 32-20 savage 23c is like a giant model 2 , one main action screw with inletting done to a high standard, and man does this thing shoot !
so i'd give your stock for your cz a go , there's nothing like a project to keep us fellas busy , and after effort and some swearing , the satisfaction for a job well done is so rewarding

[bigrich]

It's hard not to get bad machining marks now days.
My smith was amazed that my CZ shot so well before it went bad; he reckoned old Clouse must have been drunk on a Friday arvo when he made my chamber.

Was a dark Turkish walnut .308 Lithgow shooting today; he loved it, and the way it shot ADI ammo.
I like the look of plywood ones better myself.

I've got a collection of Ruger 77/22's, two walnut stocked polished-blued .22's and a .22WMRF, a 17HMR laminated varmint, and two stainless "paddles".
To me they are the epitome of what a rimfire should be, twin-locking lugs, actions scaled down centrefire '77's, and those gorgeous BX-1 & 2 magazines that never misfeed and sit beautifully flush.
AND they easily shoot as well as my CZ with proper hunting ammo. Which is why I'm so harsh in expectations about Brno's.

I just don't get why nobody ever considers them, and to me as a metal guy, sitting those others next to one makes those look like amateurish cost-cutting. That's going to upset some blokes, but oh well.

i really like the full size feel and weight of ruger 77 rimfires , i've read a lot of good and a lot of bad about them accuracy wise , which makes me hesitant to get one . they switched from pressed barrels to screwed in a some point due to accuracy issues . so i've read anyway
they do seem like a quality firearm . replacement mags aren't too hard to get either . i prefer the cz mags as these are very easy to remove from a rifle and reload even in the dark . one or two of the ruger american rimfires i've had a play with had really sticky mags that took a knack for removing and refitting .
still, ruger 77 rimfire is food for thought .

[Wapiti]

The '77 mags drop out into your hand Rich.
I also have a couple of Ruger Americans that use these mags too, and same thing.

Yes there's a lot of talk about these rifles being inconsistent accuracy-wise.
It's always "A mate of an uncles boyfriend" has one that's no good. Yeah yeah.

My sample of 5 are all excellent, I would not have bought a second, a third and others if they were crap on the target. They are outstanding.
I was mortified when Ruger stopped making them because they were expensive to make and machine, and the cheaper Americans just meant everyone just went to the more economy rimfire instead with it's easy to make round-stock action.
And it's simple bolt handle single locking lug, like the side garden gate latch.

Barrels were slip-in and secured exactly the same way as the 10/22's were, the same method.
In the 10/22 everyone loved that idea cos you could change barrels to anything you wished. Which is actually more expensive to make than a simple thread on a rimfire. But the pressure to get the cost down meant they went to threading them in too right before they discontinued the rifles to try and get the costs down but it never worked, the Americans still were considerably cheaper to make and sell.

I bought a slip-in Lilja stainless target barrel for one of the paddles to see if it made any difference, with a tight chamber where the projectile enters the rifling as it's chambered. All that did was turn it into a rifle that would shoot tiny groups with target ammo, but didn't like my HV bunny bullets, so it came off.

Isn't it awesome that Cat A firearms don't need a "Genuine reason" to get another one and you can buy the great stuff. I have more Ruger rimfire rifles alone than twice Minns's limit, and it isn't because they aren't what I consider a rimfire that was made without cutting any corners in design.

I could post pics of tiny groups with the '77's but it's pointless, people still just repeat the crap they read from people justifying what they bought by ragging something they are jealous of. That means, there are a few more on the second-hand racks in the gun shops for me to potentially buy.

It's like the Holden/Ford sticker thing from years back.
"Fords were invented to keep f**kwits from buying Holdens" and vice versa.
More for me potentially.

[Fester]

It's interesting, as I thought most 22s were very accurate unless unlucky.
My CZ 452 had never been touched apart from the trigger spring and never needed bedding, as it just shot so well as to consider doing it.

If the Rugers get lots of bad shooters, there is not much other appeal to me with modern cheap boat paddles.
I ute gun or knockabout maybe. Aussie Reviews loves them for some reason, and his have always shot well.
Nice woody Rugers may be before my time, as I didn't shoot through my midlife.

Hunting ammo can be fine if it's 1/2" capable at 50.
I buy bricks of hunting ammo and bricks of plinking ammo like CCI std.
Sometimes CCI could near be used for group shooting, but who wants to see the flyer go out of the single ragged hole.
In good light conditions on a good day, I have seen it through the scope, the shot should have been fine, and not punched it's own hole.
Some blokes reckon the flyer is guaranteed.
I buy bricks of SK to shoot groups, but refuse to pay more than that for 22 ammo, it's just not on.

Not sure if it's just my rifle, but the recent batch of CCI Velociters shoot damd fine, considering my rifle didn't like most HV ammo.
It is a bit different now with a match chamber cut, whether that has helped.
It does shoot a bigger variety of ammo more consistently.
If you want to do some big game 22lr hunting, test a pack; bricks are not that cheap, though, but neither are the sub HPs.

22s are fun and trigger time, so should never be overlooked, and should be everyone's first gun as everyone needs one.
Buy it first, and shoot thousands of rounds to become a good shooter, is my view.

[Wapiti]

The wood stocked 77/22's were always available, Cleavers sold heaps and heaps to it's more individualist buyers, as Jade calls them.
He means people who have certain standards and don't follow crowds. He likes to cater for them, and I appreciate that.
The Barn and The Open Range in Toowoomba snapped up all they could when the importer was told they had stopped making them. That's where I got my last one, a 22WMRF blued sporter and I arsed a lovely grained walnut stock with that one.
The blued/walnut 22LR came from the Open Range.
They sold out fast too, they didn't even advertise they got them all. Word of mouth had them all gone in a matter of weeks.
I missed out on a blued walnut sporter in 17HMR, I already had a laminated varmint 77/17, and it's a nail hammerer. There was one stainless 17 sporter left, but in the few hours I tossed up the idea of yet another stainless '77 it was sold.
I have two paddles also, one has the stander open sights and one has no opens.
AND I'm chasing a stainless sporter in 22WMR too, to match the blued/walnut one I have already.
The stainless ones were made from a different stainless than the Americans and Howas etc, that rust when you turn your back. I'm not sure what that is, but it's certainly different and they are the perfect farmers gun that's never oiled or cleaned, nothing can kill them.

It's kinda weird, those that know about them just love the fact everyone goes for all the same CZ's and all the other stuff that's so pushed by the marketing machine, which is fine by me.

[bigrich]

The wood stocked 77/22's were always available, Cleavers sold heaps and heaps to it's more individualist buyers, as Jade calls them.
He means people who have certain standards and don't follow crowds. He likes to cater for them, and I appreciate that.
The Barn and The Open Range in Toowoomba snapped up all they could when the importer was told they had stopped making them. That's where I got my last one, a 22WMRF blued sporter and I arsed a lovely grained walnut stock with that one.
The blued/walnut 22LR came from the Open Range.
They sold out fast too, they didn't even advertise they got them all. Word of mouth had them all gone in a matter of weeks.
I missed out on a blued walnut sporter in 17HMR, I already had a laminated varmint 77/17, and it's a nail hammerer. There was one stainless 17 sporter left, but in the few hours I tossed up the idea of yet another stainless '77 it was sold.
I have two paddles also, one has the stander open sights and one has no opens.
AND I'm chasing a stainless sporter in 22WMR too, to match the blued/walnut one I have already.
The stainless ones were made from a different stainless than the Americans and Howas etc, that rust when you turn your back. I'm not sure what that is, but it's certainly different and they are the perfect farmers gun that's never oiled or cleaned, nothing can kill them.

It's kinda weird, those that know about them just love the fact everyone goes for all the same CZ's and all the other stuff that's so pushed by the marketing machine, which is fine by me.

i've been looking at the ruger 77 rimfires lately , i think your missing a 17WSM for your collection looking at the ballistics it's impressive stuff for a rimfire . i've always thought there's a niche for a 22cal version of the 17WSM , a 22 hornet you don't have to worry about reloading . just a thought/daydream

[Fester]

The wood stocked 77/22's were always available, Cleavers sold heaps and heaps to it's more individualist buyers, as Jade calls them.
He means people who have certain standards and don't follow crowds. He likes to cater for them, and I appreciate that.
The Barn and The Open Range in Toowoomba snapped up all they could when the importer was told they had stopped making them. That's where I got my last one, a 22WMRF blued sporter and I arsed a lovely grained walnut stock with that one.
The blued/walnut 22LR came from the Open Range.
They sold out fast too, they didn't even advertise they got them all. Word of mouth had them all gone in a matter of weeks.
I missed out on a blued walnut sporter in 17HMR, I already had a laminated varmint 77/17, and it's a nail hammerer. There was one stainless 17 sporter left, but in the few hours I tossed up the idea of yet another stainless '77 it was sold.
I have two paddles also, one has the stander open sights and one has no opens.
AND I'm chasing a stainless sporter in 22WMR too, to match the blued/walnut one I have already.
The stainless ones were made from a different stainless than the Americans and Howas etc, that rust when you turn your back. I'm not sure what that is, but it's certainly different and they are the perfect farmers gun that's never oiled or cleaned, nothing can kill them.

It's kinda weird, those that know about them just love the fact everyone goes for all the same CZ's and all the other stuff that's so pushed by the marketing machine, which is fine by me.

I am not sure about marketing with rifles; there seemed to be very little, and I was surprised how nothing much had changed when I came back into shooting and went looking for a .22lr.

I had a quick thought about Savage and Marlin, then started looking at what shops had in stock.
At the time, when I saw the CZ American for just a few hundred more than the cheap plastic rifles, it was my immediate choice.

I generally never do the order-and-wait thing, and I don't like how the industry runs; it wouldn't work in other retail industries, but shooters can be treated like s_t and often are.
I go to different shops, looking at the stock they have, and keen to sell.
Most have saved a few hundred off an order, wait, and pay the full RRP.

The shop I used for the first rifle, the CZ 452, unwrapped 3, so I got some good grain, also a sale price of around $600 with rings and a cheap Tasco; my first scope upgrade was a $220 sale priced Bushy, that still gets hand-me-down usage.

Ruger woodies would have been on the list, but if not in stock and no chance of sale prices, the CZ was the likely choice.

What did the wood-stocked Rugers sell for new about 13 years back, just in comparison to what I bought?

I did like the look of some straight-shaped, wood-stocked Ruger hunting rifles in bigger cals, they just don't seem to be on the shelves as much at the shops.
I have bought rifles from all the big shops, and a smaller one or 2, bought stuff from every shop between Sydney and the Gong, so you get to see what is on the shelves, and what shop to buy what ammo and stuff.

There must be some marketing, as Sydney ranges were full of tactical rifles within a few short years.
We used to call them Macarno sets and stuff, but didn't they take over?
Not like I would ever carry one in the field, but you hear of blokes doing it.
Chasis rifles are never cheap, and the sellers like that.
I know one big shop where the first thing they are trained to do is sell the upgrade and next exy item up the price list on every opportunity.

I helped a mate buy a CZ and Howa 1500, but they showed him the staino and Mini, getting a few more $.
He was a lost cause, as I tried to explain that he should upgrade the scope choices from rock bottom, but I failed.
He got the cheap Nikkos for the rifles that didn't come with them.
I set them up when house-sitting on his block, and one was a dud that wouldn't hold zero; the other was fine.

I