CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

I know of one so far, let's see if more show up.

Moderator: MudBug

CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

Postby fal777 » Mon Jan 07, 2019 4:45 pm

Not a bolt action but certainly not an AR,
Anyone have experience with this rifle in 450 BM?
Have several ARs in variety of calibers but I found this CVA in another forum and I like the idea of a single shot
Any thoughts or feedback appreciated
fal777
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 10:15 am

Re: CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

Postby Al in Mi » Tue Jan 08, 2019 5:48 am

welcome aboard.........................couple guys at work have the blued version, no complaints with factory ammo, they are not MOA shooters but hold 1 1/2" pretty easy which tickles them over their old slug guns.

been eyeing one up for a cast bullet project this spring, figure with the brake the girls could use it in the fall if they chose.
User avatar
Al in Mi
 
Posts: 1459
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:24 am

Re: CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

Postby KenMI » Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:49 pm

I had one in 2017. Accuracy wasn't an issue at all. Was getting one hole groups the first time to the range.
The scope mount that comes with it is junk. Mine came with the one piece base/ring mount. Never used that. They now come with the rail, which I did use. Problem is, the rail is not perfectly compatible with Warne rings. They fit, but not like they fit on Warne bases. So, the rings might not hold well on the rail.
And, with the rimless case, the extractor puts pressure on the case, making brass removal a bit difficult. On mine, I found the extractor spring was undersized, allowing it to jam under the extractor, preventing unloading. I was able to locate a stainless spring the correct size, which eliminated that issue.
The forend is easy to adjust for tension and barrel to forend gap. That is important.
Once I ordered my Ruger, I sold the CVA. However, I then bought a Scout in 44 mag. The difference is night and day. It is a much better gun with rimmed cartridges. The 44 cases flick right out with no extractor drag. I tried the CVA rail on the 44, but still got ring movement with Warnes. Switched to Warne bases and it is rock solid now.
KenMI
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:54 am

Re: CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

Postby Hoot » Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:44 pm

KenMI wrote:I had one in 2017. Accuracy wasn't an issue at all. Was getting one hole groups the first time to the range.
The scope mount that comes with it is junk. Mine came with the one piece base/ring mount. Never used that. They now come with the rail, which I did use. Problem is, the rail is not perfectly compatible with Warne rings. They fit, but not like they fit on Warne bases. So, the rings might not hold well on the rail.
And, with the rimless case, the extractor puts pressure on the case, making brass removal a bit difficult. On mine, I found the extractor spring was undersized, allowing it to jam under the extractor, preventing unloading. I was able to locate a stainless spring the correct size, which eliminated that issue.
The forend is easy to adjust for tension and barrel to forend gap. That is important.
Once I ordered my Ruger, I sold the CVA. However, I then bought a Scout in 44 mag. The difference is night and day. It is a much better gun with rimmed cartridges. The 44 cases flick right out with no extractor drag. I tried the CVA rail on the 44, but still got ring movement with Warnes. Switched to Warne bases and it is rock solid now.


There is a slight difference in the dimensional specification for Weaver style bases and the M1913 Picatinny rail. I have always noticed a disagreement trying to mount Weaver style scope rings (often older products) on a Picatinny rail. Conversely, rings intended for a Picatinny rail tend to be a little sloppy on a Weaver style base. I don't recall where saw it but someone somewhere had the two side by side with their respective dimensions called out. It was the first time I ever saw the comparison but it instantly made sense why there's a different feel when crossing platforms. All I have seen mentioned about the difference elsewhere is the recoil slots having different width and spacing but I swear there is more to it than just that. I've seen Weaver style bases with a slightly rounded top versus the Picatinny with a perfectly flat top and the angle of the ears are slightly different to boot.

Hoot
In Theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In Practice, there is.
User avatar
Hoot
 
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:34 am
Location: Minnesota

Re: CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

Postby CJP1 » Wed Jan 09, 2019 5:03 am

I like mine so far. Even with the radial muzzle brake, my buddy swampbug said it wasn't that loud. Mine is the take-down model. I heard from the gun dealer that I went through to have mine shipped. He said that there were four guys in his area that all had the Scouts and all got two bucks each with them. Their minimum range was 150 yards. I would say they really like theirs.
CJP1
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:31 pm
Location: Mid Michigan

Re: CVA Scout SS 450 BM Feedback?

Postby swampbug » Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:30 pm

Also cjp1 and his CVA Scout when shot front of barrel with the break didn't rise much. It sure was fun to see this gun shoot
swampbug
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:03 pm


Return to Bolt Action Rifles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests