PDA

View Full Version : Weaver mounts for a CZ 527


GrdhgKiller
12-05-2011, 06:55 PM
I got a new CZ 527 coming that I would like to use the Burris Signature Zee rings. I therefore need to get a weaver style mount to use these rings. I have looked at two styles/brands and wondered if anyone had any experience with these or other weaver mounts for the CZ 527. One mount I looked at is made by D.I.P. and appears to use top mount screws to apply pressure to the top of the dovetail to hold it in place. This mount costs about $40 http://www.diproductsinc.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=112045&CAT=3600
The other mount is listed at CZ/USA and cost $60 it appears to use side screws to hold it in place and appears to be more substantial. It also has no cut out above the loading area and has more slots available.
https://shop.cz-usa.com/P-19010/Weaver-Adapter-Rail-527-16mm-Dovetail.aspx Any comments or suggestions for these or other weaver mounts. Bill

Chuck Miller
12-05-2011, 07:02 PM
Doesn't Burris sell a Sig ring set that fits the 527? Seems you'll be paying as much for an adapter to mount the Sig Zee rings as the rings themselves.

wirelessguy2005
12-05-2011, 09:06 PM
I researched and tested a few of the weaver base conversions for the CZ 527. I really wasn't impressed with any of the designs currently on the market. We were thinking about producing a weaver base conversion of our own and after doing some investigating i put the idea aside for the time being.
Personally i like Burris Signature zee rings and have them on many of my rifles. There isn't currently a set offered for the CZ, however a good second choice is the Leupold rings.

GrdhgKiller
12-05-2011, 10:57 PM
Did you test either of the ones I posted links. If other ones which ones and what in particular did you not like about them. My main concerns were that they had a positive connection to the CZ dovetail mount and that they were not too bulky looking. Bill

william t. oviatt
12-05-2011, 11:52 PM
I have a pair of the CZ mounts and have one mounted on a 221Fireball. But have not shot it yet. It does seem substantially made. Attaches easily and firmly to the CZ mounts. i don't know how the ejection of a cartridge will be effected by the additional metal above the ejection port-have to check that when I shoot it!

Bill

Old Hawkeye
12-06-2011, 12:25 AM
Look at the Warne rings. I have a set on a 527 that are the Quick Detach style & am very pleased with them. The non Quick Detach are almost identical & both make a compact streamlined set up that offer a solid mounting system. Weaver type bases are usually made of soft aluminum & usually don't correspond to the best accuracy. Combine that with the silly lock screw thing and it gets even worse. If you get the modified bolt handle from James Calhoon you can use a lower set of rings as the bolt handle will clear the scope bell better.

Old Hawkeye
12-06-2011, 12:31 AM
Look at the Warne rings. I have a set on a 527 that are the Quick Detach style & am very pleased with them. The non Quick Detach are almost identical & both make a compact streamlined set up that offer a solid mounting system. Weaver type bases are usually made of soft aluminum & usually don't correspond to the best accuracy. Combine that with the silly lock screw thing and it gets even worse. Get a modified bolt handle from James Calhoon and you can use lower rings & still clear the scope bell.

GLWenzl
12-06-2011, 12:39 AM
Talley makes a nice set, I have them on most of mine and Talley set theirs up with proper scope height/eye alignment meaning they are lower look nicer and a better fit (for me) but you do need to do the bolt mod thingy which isn't no biggy

GrdhgKiller
12-06-2011, 12:42 AM
My main goal was to be able to use the Burris Signature Zee 'Weaver' style rings. I like their flexible adjustment features and non marring scope feature. The factory CZ rings have always worked for me but I like use the Burris Signatures on all rifles I can. Just needed some input on any CZ 527 weaver style bases out there. Bill

wirelessguy2005
12-06-2011, 01:24 AM
I didn't test either of the options you listed. I tested a set with a design similar to the first option that you listed. The problem with that set was that in order to get it even close to working you had to tighten the set screws so tight that it left marks on the CZ receiver. Not to mention that the tolerances were way off on the machining and getting the adapters anywhere near a consistant height was a joke. The second problem is that they raise the height of scope to much, even with a shorter set of rings its not comfortable to look thru the scope. The idea behind the Weaver adapters is great, however the end product quality isn't even close to what i would consider putting on one of my CZ's. In order to get close to the accuracy potential of the rifle i would stick with the factory rings or the Leupold's. I have been slowly switching my factory CZ rings over to the Leupold rings, they look nicer and offer a better fit and finish in my opinion.

Did you test either of the ones I posted links. If other ones which ones and what in particular did you not like about them. My main concerns were that they had a positive connection to the CZ dovetail mount and that they were not too bulky looking. Bill

GrdhgKiller
12-06-2011, 05:07 AM
You answered some of my concerns, plus the situation that the mount might possibly place the scope too high. Bill
Brad by the way for the Leupold rings I would be needing the 1" size, so what height are you using for say a 42mm objective. Where are you purchasing the rings?

wirelessguy2005
12-06-2011, 01:05 PM
I used a set of Leupold high 1" rings for a 44mm adjustable objective scope. If you have a smaller objective or a side focus scope you might be able to use the medium rings. I have personally never used the Leupold medium 1" Rings so I can't tell you for sure.
As far as where to buy them I typically search around and see who has the best price. I have purchased them from Sinclair's, Midway, and another place that I can't remember the name of.

Brad

RePete
12-06-2011, 01:17 PM
Med. Warnes, and the bolt handle swap work perfect on three different scopes I've had on the "Beloved Fireball".

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o222/CharlieB401/Rifles/noname038.jpg

Charlie

Old Hawkeye
12-07-2011, 01:39 AM
My experience with CZ's is that the objective bell diameter is not the concern on scope ring height, but rather bolt clearance on the eyepiece bell. Without a Calhoon modified bolt handle you can never properly mount a scope on them so that your cheek fit on the stock matches where your eye needs to be behind the scope. This is just one of the strange things they do & makes me frustrated that they just can't seem to figure out the market here & produce a rifle that doesn't need a lot of modification to make right. Like their trigger & like their accuracy, but the hangy down mag, scope/bolt interference, & poor stock configuration are just ridiculous. We don't shoot with open sights & we don't need a five round mag. When is CZ going to wake up.

RePete
12-07-2011, 02:17 AM
When is CZ going to wake up.

I'd say about a year ago, when they released the M1 with a three rnd mag, and redesigned grip. :p

Still need to work on the bolt handle though.

Old Hawkeye
12-07-2011, 01:57 PM
RePete:
I guess I should have said they are still "dozing off" as the M1 American is only offered in 223. Still no Hornet based bolt face or any other caliber options. They make a pretty good rifle. I'm just hoping they would make a better one. The M1 would be a sweet rifle if you could barrel it to the new 17 HH!!! Sounds like CZ has no intention to chamber for the 17 HH until 2013 at the earliest, if at all.

RePete
12-07-2011, 03:09 PM
RePete:
I guess I should have said they are still "dozing off"

Yea,,, I was just jabbing ya a little (hence the smiley). ;)

Couldn't agree more about "dozing off" though.
I wonder how many sales that stupid bolt handle and magazine cost CZ? Especially in the US.

Charlie