Interarms CZ Mark X .30-06

17761 Views 26 Replies 16 Participants Last post by iskra, Feb 22, 2021

Kurz

Discussion Starter · Apr 25, 2010

Well, I posted a thread in the Czech weapons area but I'm not too sure it belongs there since this is a commercial hunting rifle.

Anyway, picked up an Interarms CZ Mark X today. It has the usual dings that most hunting rifles acquire over the years. I've been cleaning it up for most of the night... It was filthy. The rifle came with a Bushnell Banner Wide Angle 3x9 scope and see-through mounts.

Has anyone ever owned one of these and if so, was it a good gun? What sort of accuracy should I expect? I didn't know much about these before the purchase but I had read some positive remarks concerning the receiver and action. I figure with CZ on the receiver, it can't be but so bad.

Oh, I paid $325.00 for it. Any ideas on whether or not that was a fair price?

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

bernd

· #2 · Apr 25, 2010

The Interarms Mark X was based on actions made in former Yugoslavia by Zastava, not by CZ in the Czech Republic. I have a Mark X in .30-06 with a full length stock. I think I paid around $350 for it a few years ago (including the scope). The metalwork and bluing on mine is outstanding and fitting is on par with any other mass produced rifle. The stock has those ugly white spacers and a poly finish, but I guess that was the way rifles were supposed to look in the 60's/70's. As for accuracy it depend on your skills and what length you're willing to go to try and find out what ammo or handload your rifle prefers and what kind of modifications you're willing to try (glass bedding, shimming the barrel, free floating the barrel, etc.). My rifle will do 2-3" groups with Remington factory loads if I do my part and without any tinkering. I'm sure if I spend a bit of time on it I would be able to tighten the groups a bit.

Here's a pic of mine

See less See more

bartsitarski

· #3 · Apr 25, 2010

I have a Remington 798 in .308win. After Interarms stopped importing the Mark X from Yugoslavia, Charles Daly started. After Charles Daly stopped importing them, Remington started. At the end of the day, the receiver and, action, and barrel has not changed. They all tend to have a gritty action until they get worked a while. The metal finish on mine is great. As for accuracy, you really have to experiment with different ammo types. On my gun, I shoot 3 inch groups with regular Remingtons. All over the place with Federals. And 1 inch groups with Winchester Power Max. So.... At the end of the day, play around and see what works best. You have a great gun for a good price.

Jericho

· #4 · Apr 25, 2010

Back in the 90s it was common to see several Mark Xs in gunshops and pawnshops, custom and
factory. Now you seldom see them. I dont see many Remington 798s or 799s around either.

HerrMesser

· #5 · Apr 26, 2010

I bought a Charles Daly just before remington 798 came out. Just playing with hand loads I was getting 1.5" groups.

Rad

Beck

· #6 · Apr 26, 2010

I had a Mark X Whitworth in .30-06 back in the 80's, I paid $336.00 new. The only issue I had with it was the stock was too thick, they could have thinned it down a bit around the barrel, it must have been 1/4" to 5/16" thick. I am very fond of the trim British and German stocks.

R,
Beck

Kurz

Discussion Starter · #7 · Apr 26, 2010

Thanks for the replies...

I guess since I won't be handloading anytime soon, it sounds like I can expect somewhere around 3" groups with my occasional (but traditional) spasmodic trigger yank flyer that goes 8 inches from center.

I wrote a lengthy conversation-like reply yesterday and for some reason when I attempted to post it, it didn't work. Anyway, I am sooooo confused about the CZ emblem thing on the side. I mean, I have no problem with Zastava, but I thought CZ meant, well, CZ.

Can someone clear this up for me?

HerrMesser

· #8 · Apr 27, 2010

Can you post a pic of it?

Rad

bernd

· #9 · Apr 27, 2010

The logos look somewhat similar. The czech stands for "Czeskoslovenska Zbrojovka", the yugoslavian is "Crvena Zastava"....

WVchuck

· #10 · Apr 27, 2010

They are well built rifles capable of very nice accuracy with the right load.
I picked up one in 30-06 back in the early 90's with a synthetic stock and camo finish on the metal that is used for bad weather hunting.
It has yet to fail to put a deer on the ground with one shot.
I liked it so well after that first season of use that I went back to the shop to pick up the blued version in a beautiful walnut stock that was chambered for .308 Win, but it had been sold.

Wynn

· #11 · Apr 28, 2010

I picked up a Mark X (Interarms import) in 79 with a full length stock in 243. Scoped it with a 2x7 Leoupold. It was outstanding on groundhogs to 350 yds with Hornady 100 gr SP. Took a couple of nice bucks with it as well.

Kurz

Discussion Starter · #12 · Apr 28, 2010 (Edited)

4

Well, I went ahead and took on the task of refinishing the stock... Wow, that was a job. I just couldn't stand that super shiny poly coat. There are still a few cosmetic things that I will tend to as time permits. The number one thing that is killing me is the fact that the trigger guard had some surface rust so I did the 0000 steel wool and oil trick. It worked except on the area where the front screw is located. Before I knew it, that blueing was lightened a great deal and I still have the darn rust. Oh well, I will either reblue it myself or have someone hot dip it. I have heard Herter's Belgian Blue or Brownell's Oxy - something or another is good, too. Anyway, here are a few pics.

Oh, Tip of the Day: For those of you older and wiser than me, pay no heed to this... But for those of you that might be still in the learning stage, never make the mistake of getting stripper on a black plastic forend cap. Its amazing just how FAST stripper melts that plastic. I honestly thought I had ruined the stock - what a nightmare. I had to basically reshape the forend cap after that act of stupidity.

See less See more

Kurz

Discussion Starter · #13 · Apr 28, 2010

Oh... One other question. I am wondering if I should get the headspace checked before firing it. I mostly buy old military stuff and wouldn't even THINK about firing those old guns without getting them checked out first. But I don't know if its necessary to do that with a newer gun like this. Any advice is appreciated.

bernd

· #14 · Apr 28, 2010

If the bolt and receiver serial are matching I wouldn't worry about headspace. Otherwise borrow some 8mm gauges or take it to a gunsmith, just in case...

Kurz

Discussion Starter · #15 · Apr 28, 2010 (Edited)

2

bernd said:
If the bolt and receiver serial are matching I wouldn't worry about headspace. Otherwise borrow some 8mm gauges or take it to a gunsmith, just in case...

Here's the weird thing... The serial number on the outside (close to the scope mount) doesn't match the bolt. BUT the serial number on the tang (under the bolt - in the groove) matches the bolt. I looked at the other Mark X's at the pawn shop and they were done in the same fashion.

See less See more

ktr

· #16 · Apr 28, 2010

I'm guess, but the bolt # and the # in the sear groove in the back of the receiver are assembly numbers and were put there during mfg'r to make sure the correct bolt got matched back up with the correct barreled receiver when the gun was final assembled. Numbering was done most likely when the final headspacing was cut.
The actual serial number of the rifle was stamped on after final assembly and that is the number you see up on the receiver by the scope mount, probably on the front receiver ring of the action.

British sporting rifles had that sort of numbering on some of them and I'm sure other mfg'rs used it also.
S&W used assembly numbers on the revolver frame and crane assemblys to make sure they could be reunited if separated before the serial numbers were stamped onto those parts later in the manufacturing process.

DK PHILLIPS

· #17 · Apr 29, 2010

had the Whitworth 1980 american field very accurate TOUCHING groups at 100 yards with 180 federals out to 200 yards very accurate right out of the box- loved the FANCY GRAINED STOCK stock.<><dk

Kurz

Discussion Starter · #18 · Apr 29, 2010

DK... What is the difference between the Whitworth and the Mark X?

I'm taking it to the range tomorrow so hopefully I'll get some good results. Not expecting too much at first, considering I gotta work with the scope a bit and get it zero'ed. I was practicing today with Snap Cap .30-06 rounds to get used to the trigger pull and master my breathing a bit. It never ceases to amaze me how much even my heartbeat moves the scope's field of vision. I'll be shooting off a sand bag and bench but the range's benches don't fit me well at all. It feels like they were all tailor made for 8 year olds. Well, I guess if I bring back bad groups I can blame it on the bench, right?

DK PHILLIPS

· #19 · Apr 29, 2010

well the wood and ads were trying to tie these Yugo's to the ENGLISH names sake- Am. field had THE Pretty wood, maybe a nicer metal polish before bluing and a better fit.:thumbsup:
but basically a classier over all look with pad and finished wood less glossy.
but all in all same guns just graded a little different in appearance THAN OTHER mark x's.
we shot mine in like a bench rest rifle cleaning after every 6 shots, a slow break in not letting heat or dirtiness build up.
ps real good gun but a little sloppy in the action, wobble AT THE END OF BOLT TRAVEL- like any Mauser when working the bolt out to eject.
traded it for a Husky thats has the best wood on any ive every seen up close. :clap:keep it for 8 or more years shot good, hunted with it each year talk of the hunting camp.

Brithunter

· #20 · May 1, 2010

Nice rifle shame about those godawful mounts. The first thing I woud have done is remove them and throw them in the trash where they belong. Get some decent mounts it will help no end. Some of thsoe rifles had adjustable triggers and soem didn't. A friend has a Whitworth .243 and it has the std M98 trigger so I just polished and stoned it and it's fine now.

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.