Ring height. CZ452

[colroggal]

So I just ordered a shiny new CZ.452 American (lefty - Prophet River still has a couple more if anyone is interested). I'm going to be mounting a Leupold vx3 4.5-14×40 with tip-off rings. My question, and I'm hoping someone out in AO world has something similar, is do you think I can get away with medium height rings, or should I get the high ones? I was looking at weaver grand slams.

Other suggestions are welcome of course. I would like to get a weaver/pic rail, but my frustrating Google search has lead me to believe such a thing is carved from the shin bones of pink Unicorns. No one has one.

Thanks

Colin

[pikergolf]

I have these rings on my 452. Bottom of page, rimfire.
I found the med to be a little to low, for my face, but they did allow full function of the rifle.I bought a different scope with a adjustable objective, 40mm but the adjustment was on the bell and I needed to go to the high ring, it is very high and I will have to build the cheek piece of my stock up. You can reference the height of these rings to the rings you have chosen.
https://www.burrisoptics.com/signature-rings

[colroggal]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

I have these rings on my 452. Bottom of page, rimfire.
I found the med to be a little to low, for my face, but they did allow full function of the rifle.I bought a different scope with a adjustable objective, 40mm but the adjustment was on the bell and I needed to go to the high ring, it is very high and I will have to build the cheek piece of my stock up. You can reference the height of these rings to the rings you have chosen.
https://www.burrisoptics.com/signature-rings

Thanks, PG. by those numbers the 40mm bell will work with medium rings. The Tikka that this scope is coming off of uses med rings that measure .97 and they're sitting on a weaver base. It's still a bit of a squish to get my face down where it needs to be. That makes me think I should go for the 1.29 high rings to fit my squirrel cheek.

Colin

[tim3500]

I have a lefty 452 and went with the Talley 11 mm Hi . The lows had interference with The scope on the bolt

[Groundhogger]

If memory serves, my 2 CZ 452s both wear WARNE 722M. They should be "high" rings, so confirm that part #. I'd recommend HIGH, as their medium height rings seem to demand that the scope be smaller at the "eyeball" end. (Can't remember my scope terminology )

There are scope rings I like more, scope rings that are easier to mount a scope into than these WARNE ones...but they are minimal, affordable, durable, etc. Zero issues

Scope pictured has a 40mm OBJ

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by colroggal

So I just ordered a shiny new CZ.452 American (lefty - Prophet River still has a couple more if anyone is interested). I'm going to be mounting a Leupold vx3 4.5-14×40 with tip-off rings. My question, and I'm hoping someone out in AO world has something similar, is do you think I can get away with medium height rings, or should I get the high ones? I was looking at weaver grand slams.

Other suggestions are welcome of course. I would like to get a weaver/pic rail, but my frustrating Google search has lead me to believe such a thing is carved from the shin bones of pink Unicorns. No one has one.

Thanks

Colin

So first off the American has no iron sights so tipoff or quick detach rings serve no purpose. Second, are you planning to use the built in grooves. The issue with ca is clearance of the bolt handle to the rear lenses housing and magnification ring. With the Leipold and mounted on the grooves, Leupold brand med rings will work fine. Putting a weaver moa rail will give u no advantage unless you are trying to shoot over 200 yards. I would suggest a mil dot reticle. Makes holdovers way easier past 100.

You can get weaver bases that mount to the grooves then use weaver pic type rings but again I see no advantage to having one more component in the system.

[colroggal]

Originally Posted by Dean2

So first off the American has no iron sights so tipoff or quick detach rings serve no purpose. Second, are you planning to use the built in grooves. The issue with ca is clearance of the bolt handle to the rear lenses housing and magnification ring. With the Leipold and mounted on the grooves, Leupold brand med rings will work fine. Putting a weaver moa rail will give u no advantage unless you are trying to shoot over 200 yards. I would suggest a mil dot reticle. Makes holdovers way easier past 100.

You can get weaver bases that mount to the grooves then use weaver pic type rings but again I see no advantage to having one more component in the system.

I'll be using the 3/8" dovetail. Sounds like med height rings will work, but the high ones will put my face where it needs to be without too much squish.

I wasn't looking to get an moa rail, just a flat weaver.or pic rail, but not one to attach to the dovetail. Just adds another layer of complexity.

Colin

[Pathfinder76]

Medium Talley’s.

[6.5 shooter]

Originally Posted by Groundhogger

If memory serves, my 2 CZ 452s both wear WARNE 722M. They should be "high" rings, so confirm that part #. I'd recommend HIGH, as their medium height rings seem to demand that the scope be smaller at the "eyeball" end. (Can't remember my scope terminology )

There are scope rings I like more, scope rings that are easier to mount a scope into than these WARNE ones...but they are minimal, affordable, durable, etc. Zero issues

Scope pictured has a 40mm OBJ

Same exact rings I use on all my CZ rimfires not lefties but that is not a concern..They are less expensive then some others $40 bucks I think. easy to mount..just put a small drop of oil on the scope before you "pop" them over the scope tube..The eye? bell is your biggest concern if it is to large then taller rings are in order....The above rings will also fit the 11 mm dove tail as well as the 3/8" depending on the year of your CZ

PS wipe the oil off the scope and rings when your done.

[270person]

I'd go high rings. That's a big scope on top.

Why not just mount a 32, 33, or 36mm?

[colroggal]

Originally Posted by 270person

I'd go high rings. That's a big scope on top.

Why not just mount a 32, 33, or 36mm?

Because I have the Leupold already. It's a good and proven scope.

Colin

[colroggal]

Solution has come to me. I'll get the med rings and try it out. If it's too low either for my face, the bell or bolt clearance I'll get high ones and save the med ones for my henry frontier. If I scope.that it's only going to be wearing a 24 or 32mm scope.

Thanks fellas. Groundhogger, Chuck - beautiful rifles.

Colin

[Big Sky]

I'm a little late to the party, but I'm going to chime in anyways.
Good info here. Here's some more. Hopefully.

Most 452's and all 455's are 11mm dovetail and are easier to find rings for.
The cz 452 American has an odd dovetail size. They list it as 3/8.



However, many people that have tried to install 3/8 rings have found that they don't fit properly. The rings sit slightly canted. I had this issue when I first tried mounting a scope on my 452 American.
If you google ' rimfirecentral cz 452 american canted rings' you should get a lot of info. IIRC cz measures the width of the dovetail differently than American manufacturers do.

Some 3/8 rings will work. Some will not. I would either go to a store like Fly's and try the rings there before I purchase or I would buy the rings that someone that I trust has successfully used on their 452 American.
Leupold makes a 13mm ring that is supposed to fit the cz 452 american dovetail. Rimfirecentral would have lots of info on that

My solution for my 452 American was to use J&P dovetail adapters.



The adapters slide on to the dovetail and then you can use either Burris Zee or Burris Signature Rings. I used Burris sig zee rings with the offset inserts. The inserts can double as a sloped rail if you are wanting to shoot your 22 out to 200m.

Anyhow, I have a Leupold scope that would have similar dimensions to the OP's.
Eyepiece diameter approx 1.6 inch
Objective diameter approx 1.8 inch
With the J&P inserts and Burris SigZee rings in medium height I have a gap of approx 0.13 inch between the barrel and the objective. And is the case with most Leupold scopes there is a ton of clearance for the bolt.

And a word to the wise. CZ suggests a 20 cal rod for their 22cal rimfires. Their barrels are a bit tight and can shave off some of the coating on a cleaning rod. This info can be found in the FAQ's of the cz usa website. A thread adapter may be required to use 22 cal jags on a 20cal rod.

Another 'nice to have' is a bolt buddy. J&P sells them. I made one out of a lid from a pop bottle, some epoxy and a spent case.

[teberle]

Good post here. I've been down this road with the same rifle and ended up with the Talley rings pictured in Chuck's post. As mentioned earlier, the objective bell clearing the barrel is not the issue; it's the question of whether the ocular bell will interfere with the movement of the bolt handle, owing to the 90 degree bolt throw. I have the medium Talleys and they work perfectly on the oddball 3/8 dovetail with a Leupold vx1 rimfire. It has a 28mm objective lens, and the ocular bell is the same diameter as the objective. You might be better off with the high Talleys if your ocular bell is much bigger.

Also a good bit of information on the cleaning rod. A 22 cal rod will not fit in the bore of a 452. I wouldn't worry about the thread adapter though. Just get a 20 cal jag to go with your 20 cal rod. I use a 17 rod and jag on mine and it works fine.

Originally Posted by Big Sky

I'm a little late to the party, but I'm going to chime in anyways.
Good info here. Here's some more. Hopefully.

Most 452's and all 455's are 11mm dovetail and are easier to find rings for.
The cz 452 American has an odd dovetail size. They list it as 3/8.



However, many people that have tried to install 3/8 rings have found that they don't fit properly. The rings sit slightly canted. I had this issue when I first tried mounting a scope on my 452 American.
If you google ' rimfirecentral cz 452 american canted rings' you should get a lot of info. IIRC cz measures the width of the dovetail differently than American manufacturers do.

Some 3/8 rings will work. Some will not. I would either go to a store like Fly's and try the rings there before I purchase or I would buy the rings that someone that I trust has successfully used on their 452 American.
Leupold makes a 13mm ring that is supposed to fit the cz 452 american dovetail. Rimfirecentral would have lots of info on that

My solution for my 452 American was to use J&P dovetail adapters.



The adapters slide on to the dovetail and then you can use either Burris Zee or Burris Signature Rings. I used Burris sig zee rings with the offset inserts. The inserts can double as a sloped rail if you are wanting to shoot your 22 out to 200m.

Anyhow, I have a Leupold scope that would have similar dimensions to the OP's.
Eyepiece diameter approx 1.6 inch
Objective diameter approx 1.8 inch
With the J&P inserts and Burris SigZee rings in medium height I have a gap of approx 0.13 inch between the barrel and the objective. And is the case with most Leupold scopes there is a ton of clearance for the bolt.

And a word to the wise. CZ suggests a 20 cal rod for their 22cal rimfires. Their barrels are a bit tight and can shave off some of the coating on a cleaning rod. This info can be found in the FAQ's of the cz usa website. A thread adapter may be required to use 22 cal jags on a 20cal rod.

Another 'nice to have' is a bolt buddy. J&P sells them. I made one out of a lid from a pop bottle, some epoxy and a spent case.

[6.5 shooter]

Just a heads up,,,,CCI stingers are also not a good choice in the CZ rimfires...the chamber is cut to semi match dimensions and CCI stingers are built off of a weee bit longer brass casing then "normal" rimfire casings and have been know to create pressure issues as well as brass being stripped off the case mouth on firing.

Will they go bang? yes...I use CCI mini mags they are awesome .

[Smokinyotes]

I have a LH 452 in 17hmr. The medium Talley rings, the same as chucks are what I have. This little gun shoots good but was a little disappointed that my sons ugly savage GLV17R shot just as good.

[colroggal]

Originally Posted by Smokinyotes

I have a LH 452 in 17hmr. The medium Talley rings, the same as chucks are what I have. This little gun shoots good but was a little disappointed that my sons ugly savage GLV17R shot just as good.

But at least you don't have to jiggle the mag to feed the next round. That's pretty much the only reason I got rid of my Savage 93. Sold it to a member here and haven't heard any complaints.

I'm hoping the CZ will be as accurate. A five shot ragged hole is mighty impressive when you're talking about shooting .30's, but a 5 shot ragged hole shooting a .17...

Colin

[colroggal]

Originally Posted by Big Sky

I'm a little late to the party, but I'm going to chime in anyways.
Good info here. Here's some more. Hopefully.

Most 452's and all 455's are 11mm dovetail and are easier to find rings for.
The cz 452 American has an odd dovetail size. They list it as 3/8.



However, many people that have tried to install 3/8 rings have found that they don't fit properly. The rings sit slightly canted. I had this issue when I first tried mounting a scope on my 452 American.
If you google ' rimfirecentral cz 452 american canted rings' you should get a lot of info. IIRC cz measures the width of the dovetail differently than American manufacturers do.

Some 3/8 rings will work. Some will not. I would either go to a store like Fly's and try the rings there before I purchase or I would buy the rings that someone that I trust has successfully used on their 452 American.
Leupold makes a 13mm ring that is supposed to fit the cz 452 american dovetail. Rimfirecentral would have lots of info on that

My solution for my 452 American was to use J&P dovetail adapters.



The adapters slide on to the dovetail and then you can use either Burris Zee or Burris Signature Rings. I used Burris sig zee rings with the offset inserts. The inserts can double as a sloped rail if you are wanting to shoot your 22 out to 200m.

Anyhow, I have a Leupold scope that would have similar dimensions to the OP's.
Eyepiece diameter approx 1.6 inch
Objective diameter approx 1.8 inch
With the J&P inserts and Burris SigZee rings in medium height I have a gap of approx 0.13 inch between the barrel and the objective. And is the case with most Leupold scopes there is a ton of clearance for the bolt.

And a word to the wise. CZ suggests a 20 cal rod for their 22cal rimfires. Their barrels are a bit tight and can shave off some of the coating on a cleaning rod. This info can be found in the FAQ's of the cz usa website. A thread adapter may be required to use 22 cal jags on a 20cal rod.

Another 'nice to have' is a bolt buddy. J&P sells them. I made one out of a lid from a pop bottle, some epoxy and a spent case.

Good info BigSky. Thanks. I would prefer a weaver mount. The scope I'd like to put on it has a 30mm tube. That would make life easier.

As it stands, I've still got some time to consider my options. Somehow Canada Post got Calgary and Grande Prairie confused.

Colin

[Savage Bacon]

Originally Posted by Groundhogger

If memory serves, my 2 CZ 452s both wear WARNE 722M. They should be "high" rings, so confirm that part #. I'd recommend HIGH, as their medium height rings seem to demand that the scope be smaller at the "eyeball" end. (Can't remember my scope terminology )

There are scope rings I like more, scope rings that are easier to mount a scope into than these WARNE ones...but they are minimal, affordable, durable, etc. Zero issues

Scope pictured has a 40mm OBJ

Are these available locally? We got a CZ 455 for our daughter and bought the medium leupold rings that ended up being too low. Too bad they were almost $120

I was trying to mount her scope right away, trying to avoid shipping times.

[260 Rem]

I think mine are high ... the issue is not with the clearance between the scope bell/barrel, but with the bolt lift on the back end.

[Savage Bacon]

Yep that's the issue I had with the medium rings. I wanted to try the rings pictured above. I can order them here in Canada but I'd prefer to find some locally to avoid the shipping wait times.

[urban rednek]

Originally Posted by Savage Bacon

Are these available locally? We got a CZ 455 for our daughter and bought the medium leupold rings that ended up being too low. Too bad they were almost $120

I was trying to mount her scope right away, trying to avoid shipping times.

I have been using Burris #420076 rimfire rings to mount a 2.5-10x42mm AO scope on a CZ455 with great success. Specs are 0.95" high, steel with matte finish.
There is enough clearance to adjust the objective lense, however the scope cover didn't quite slip on all the way so I trimmed a notch in the cover to fit flush.

[Savage Bacon]

They fit the 11mm rail with no issues? I'd be fine with either rings.

[Big Sky]

I have a 455 in 17hmr with a Bushnell 3500 4-12x40 on it. The rings are the same ones that Urban Redneck suggested. Scope fits with no issues. Good rings.

Have also used the warne rings that groundhogger suggested. Good rings as well. They fit 11mm rail.

The bolt throw on the 455, 452 can bump into the occular. High rings can solve the issue, but sometimes the rings get too high to get a good cheek weld.

This is a pic of another cz of mine showing a Leupold scope and how the bolt does not hit the occular. The widest part of the occular is about 1.6 inch (about the same as the Bushnell I mentioned above). The cone shape of the occular housing also contributes to good bolt clearance.



What kind of scope are you trying to mount?

[Savage Bacon]

It's a Bushnell banner.

[Savage Bacon]

1.5 - 4.5 x 32

[Savage Bacon]

Well it looks like I'll be ordering rings tonight. I called around and the only place that had a set of these rings was the sportsmans den. The guy told me I had to bring the rifle in. So I drove home, which is an hour drive, to get the rifle. Then an hr and a half to get to the sportsmans den, just to stand there for 10 min holding the rifle and scope, listening to the guy bs with someone about this and that and everything else. Well I had wasted enough of the day so I just left. It's funny I kind of expected this because it's the usual reaction I get when I go in there. It was the Burris 420076 that I had decided on. Amazon says delivery between Sept 3rd and 21st. Maybe I'll just duct tape the scope on lol.

[Dean2]

Originally Posted by Savage Bacon

Well it looks like I'll be ordering rings tonight. I called around and the only place that had a set of these rings was the sportsmans den. The guy told me I had to bring the rifle in. So I drove home, which is an hour drive, to get the rifle. Then an hr and a half to get to the sportsmans den, just to stand there for 10 min holding the rifle and scope, listening to the guy bs with someone about this and that and everything else. Well I had wasted enough of the day so I just left. It's funny I kind of expected this because it's the usual reaction I get when I go in there. It was the Burris 420076 that I had decided on. Amazon says delivery between Sept 3rd and 21st. Maybe I'll just duct tape the scope on lol.

So you drove 2 1/2 hours and got ****ed off after a ten minute wait. Nothing says u couldn't interrupt politely if you were in a big rush. You have a pretty unique world view in my books.

[Savage Bacon]

Originally Posted by Dean2

So you drove 2 1/2 hours and got ****ed off after a ten minute wait. Nothing says u couldn't interrupt politely if you were in a big rush. You have a pretty unique world view in my books.

Well there's a little bit more to the story. I told the guy I'd bring the rifle in with me tomorrow and come see him. Then I got called to our south location (which is about 10 min south of my place). So I thought this was going to work out perfectly for me because I drive to red deer usually at least once a day. So I could swing by and take care of this today.

I bought the wife a rifle a couple years ago from this place. Waited over a half hour to get some service. Last June I tried to buy her a handgun that was in the cabinet. We got tired of waiting and left. Today I half expected the same thing. I didn't get ****ed off, just didn't feel like standing around all afternoon. The guy saw me, I didn't feel the need to interrupt. He was too busy.

But you are correct sir I do have a unique world view, and value your opinion

[Jerry D]

To have an extra employee working to make sure there is no wait times costs a business a $1000.00 a week probably if they are full time.

If you want your rings, to be $50 or $100.00 or $200!... thats the problem.

Finding good staff is hard, and keeping them is harder because if they are good, they are smarter and they move on because they want more $$ than what a basic retail position pays.

These guys working on the counter, their either great and want to teach, or dont know much and you need to direct them to shells you want behind the counter or they come off as miserable tacticool guys who typically ignore you when you arrive.

Ive dealt with all 3 types and working with the first 2 is much more pleasant.





Sent from my SM-A530W using Tapatalk