Zastava Rifles

[Ryry4]

Anyone on here with any experience with these rifles?

Good, Bad, Ugly?

[Tortex]

I’ve got a Remington 798 (rebranded zastava) that I really like.my experience has been that the finish can be a bit rough (apparently particularly so on the stainless models). Tough to beat a brand new, m98 action with amazing blueing and a quality stock at that price point.
The blueing really is something else. I’ve had rifles several times the price that have had a poorer finish.

[Dean2]

Own 2 in LH presently, and have owned quite a number over the past few years. Guys keep talking me into selling them to them after I have trimmed the stocks down.

They are a great gun, especially for the money. The bluing is top notch, the actions are well built and pretty well finished Mauser 98s. It takes very little work to smooth them out so they are really slick. On top of that, the triggers are fully adjustable, the stocks are good walnut and I have not had one yet that would not shoot a 1/2" 3 shot group. All of them so far will shoot under and inch with Sellier and Bellot factory ammo.

Here is the latest 7x57 that I reworked the wood on to make a classic stalking rifle out of it.

Before



After

[Dick284]

I had one, it was a pretty good rifle.
http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=262679

Why I sell some rifles is a question for a wise old guy up on some mountain someplace.

[gtr]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

Anyone on here with any experience with these rifles?

Good, Bad, Ugly?

In my experience of your choices, I would go with bad and ugly.

[jeprli]

I use a stainless 7x64, only shot it to 100yds, 1" groups or less with norma oryx and hornady gmx factory loads. Finish is not the greatest on ss but nothing that bothers me. Bolt had to be worked but is smooth operating after a little polish. Cleaning the barrel and chamber was a task, mine was packed with cosmoline as most are. You also get pressure test confirmation sheet for the rifle, i believe mine was tested to 75k psi which is a norm for 3006 family cartrige, every european manufacturer is bound by this regulation for each rifle produced.

For a 600$ rifle i'm very happy with it, much more "gun feel" than anything in that price range.

[Pathfinder76]

Talked to a gunsmith about building a rifle on that action. He said, and I quote, “turn the other way and run”.

[270person]

Originally Posted by chuck

Talked to a gunsmith about building a rifle on that action. He said, and I quote, “turn the other way and run”.

I've had gunsmiths tell me that for any short mag action. Ok maybe Walk was the term used but they def weren't in favor.

[Dean2]

To 270Person

So this is basically a commercial Mauser 98 action. I can see the 98 not being a great choice for short fat mag rounds, they weren't really designed for that type of cartridge and would likely take a lot of work to fix feeding but so would any other 98 action.

Are these smiths not fond of 98s in general or just the Zastava actions and if just the Zastava actions what is there specific issues with them that they don't have with the 100 year old versions of the 98. Would really like to understand what the actual issue is as I cannot see anything wrong with the 7x57, 9.3x62, 375 H&H or 458 Win mags I have used nor can I see why they wouldn't make a good custom in cartridges that aren't fat and stubby. Thanks.

[Pathfinder76]

This was from someone that has built on many variations of the Mauser action. From military surplus to Granite Mountain.

[Flight01]

No personal experience. Hoping to get a 7.62x39 in left hand for my nephew in the next year or so.

[wolf308]

Ya gots a lefty in 9362 for bush carry.

Slapped a temp scope on for load devel .... like .55-.6" 3 shot groups at 100 was the norm with 90% power ish loads , shooting 250 and 285s

Took off scope set iron for moa 10 " plate at 50 yards

Awesome rifle. Took hockey puck butt pad off and put a slip on recoil one.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by chuck

This was from someone that has built on many variations of the Mauser action. From military surplus to Granite Mountain.

What was the reason given for his response?

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by wolf308

Ya gots a lefty in 9362 for bush carry.

Slapped a temp scope on for load devel .... like .55-.6" 3 shot groups at 100 was the norm with 90% power ish loads , shooting 250 and 285s

Took off scope set iron for moa 10 " plate at 50 yards

Awesome rifle. Took hockey puck butt pad off and put a slip on recoil one.

Ever consider putting on a nice "grind to fit"? With a saw, some tape, a measure, a marker, and an orbital sander, even a hack like I can trim a little wood, smooth it out and custom fit a pad.

One day I'll pick up a "dangerous game" Zastava. Already got some dies waiting in the wings!

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by Tactical Lever

Ever consider putting on a nice "grind to fit"? With a saw, some tape, a measure, a marker, and an orbital sander, even a hack like I can trim a little wood, smooth it out and custom fit a pad.

One day I'll pick up a "dangerous game" Zastava. Already got some dies waiting in the wings!

The 375 H&H with some of the Monte Carlo taken out of the stock, cheek piece removed and a good recoil pad is a real sweet shooting piece. Kind of sorry I let that one go and I don't usually regret selling any of the many guns that have come through my hands.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Dean2

To 270Person

So this is basically a commercial Mauser 98 action. I can see the 98 not being a great choice for short fat mag rounds, they weren't really designed for that type of cartridge and would likely take a lot of work to fix feeding but so would any other 98 action.

Are these smiths not fond of 98s in general or just the Zastava actions and if just the Zastava actions what is there specific issues with them that they don't have with the 100 year old versions of the 98. Would really like to understand what the actual issue is as I cannot see anything wrong with the 7x57, 9.3x62, 375 H&H or 458 Win mags I have used nor can I see why they wouldn't make a good custom in cartridges that aren't fat and stubby. Thanks.

Both of these Smith's were just not in favor of short action mag rifles period. Both are decently well known guys and both said the same thing. "Nothing wrong with .300 Win and 270 Win.as they are." "Would never recommend the short mag versions of either." "Not as reliable an action."

Nothing to do with Zastava Dean.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Tactical Lever

What was the reason given for his response?

Far too much work to make it respectable.

[Quest206]

Originally Posted by chuck

Talked to a gunsmith about building a rifle on that action. He said, and I quote, “turn the other way and run”.

I would find another gunsmith

[gtr]

Originally Posted by Quest206

I would find another gunsmith

You will probably get the same answer.

[fordtruckin]

I have a work issued Remington zastava 798 in .375h&h. Definitely not light and if your not the one behind the gun the brake is a bit much. Other than that I have no issues. It hits what I need it too, in my case dispatching bison and bears. I zero it at 100 and can consistently ring a 4” gong at 200. Well inside minute of bison....

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Quest206

I would find another gunsmith

You are probably right. When it comes to Mausers he appears to be up at night. What a hack.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by chuck

Far too much work to make it respectable.

What's that supposed to mean?? That's a Trudeau answer!

Isn't that kind of a custom gun maker's job?

Do they have to file the name off the gun?

Reforge the bolt with 1.2% pixie dust?

Break out the admantium chisel set?

[Tactical Lever]

Gross! All that money into a Ruger and couldn't even radius the metal, or round the edges of the wood!

[Pathfinder76]

The work can be done. No one wants to pay fair market price for it.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Tactical Lever

Gross! All that money into a Ruger and couldn't even radius the metal, or round the edges of the wood!

Oh my goodness.

Buy the Zustava.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by chuck

The work can be done. No one wants to pay fair market price for it.

Kinda scratching around the outside a' this one Chuck.

So what you're telling me, is that there is less work to do to a bare action, replete with the accumulation of half, to a full century of firings, metal dings, and rust, than a new modern production '98 that already is sub MOA capable?

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by chuck

Oh my goodness.

Buy the Zustava.

Just kidding, mostly!

Just would like to know the difference. What exactly does a rifle need "to be respectable"?

Like I alluded to before, lot's of old actions made into nice customs.

Are you just comparing 3 or so brands who make a modern claw extractor gun?

[Pathfinder76]

What brands are you talking about?

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by 270person

Both of these Smith's were just not in favor of short action mag rifles period. Both are decently well known guys and both said the same thing. "Nothing wrong with .300 Win and 270 Win.as they are." "Would never recommend the short mag versions of either." "Not as reliable an action."

Nothing to do with Zastava Dean.

That makes sense, I too am not a fan of the short/fat magnum chamberings. The idea they are desirable because they fit in a short action is lost one me, I can cycle a long action just as fast as a short and the difference in overall length is negligible, not to mention the limitation on seating length for heavier bullets.. No real advantages and lots of draw backs, not the least of which is difficult feeding which is a real problem in a hunting rifle.

Thanks for clarifying.

[Pathfinder76]

To the OP,

Buy a Ruger or better yet a Winchester 10x the stock, 10x the safety, 10x bottom metal, and I prefer the trigger.