I Hate Buying Scopes

Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
1,737
Likes
2,696
Location
South Texas
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Why don't scope and ring manufacturers provide dimensions? Real dimensions.

For rings, we get "high", "medium", or "low"... but what does that mean? How high? How low? Manufacture A's medium is taller than B's high.

For scopes, we get weight, overall length, objective lens diameter, maybe ocular lens diameter, tube diameter, but how long is the front bell? Rear bell? How long is the section of tube in front of and behind the turrets? Other diameters?

We are trying to mount an optical system the correct distance from the shooters face at the right height to line everything up. Numbers... I need numbers.

I am trying to put a scope on a CZ 527. I have very limited range of placement for the rings on the receiver. This also tends to put the scope somewhat farther back than I would like, so knowing how long the ocular bell is and how much tube is on either side of the turrets is kind of important.

I want the scope as close to the receiver as I can get it, so knowing what the diameter of the objective bell is (not the lens) and what the taper of the bell is so that I can figure out how close to the rifle I can get.

Then I have to find rings of the correct height based on "low", "medium", and "high".

I guess the expected method is to buy $5000 of scopes and rings to mix and match until you get the combination right.

I don't mind spending the money to get it right, I just don't want to spend money guessing at what might be right.

So, weak rant aside, does anyone have any suggestions for scope/ring combinations for a CZ 527 American?
 
I feel your pain. I think I could have gone with the low Tally rings for my CZ 455 and CZ 457, but it would have been a close thing. So I took the easy way out.
 
I thonk that technically you hate buying scope rings, rather than scopes.

They go hand in hand.

I know that on the rifle I have there is a very narrow range that the rings could go. This gives me a set spacing +- about 3/8 inch. The rear ring is effectively a fixed position as it is the shortest section of dovetail and has a recoil lug (assuming that it is used). With the rear ring fixed, the farthest forward I can place a scope would be with the ocular bell pushed forward against the rear ring. Almost no one publishes the size of the ocular bell so I can't compare scopes against this feature to determine where the end of the scope sits with respect to my eye and whether this is within the eye relief for the scope.

Next, depending upon how much tube there is between the ocular bell and the turrets, I may not be able to push the scope up to the rear ring because I would land the turrets on the forward ring. If I push the turrets up to the forward ring, how much more does that push the ocular bell towards me? I can't tell because they don't publish dimensions.

Assuming that I can get the above placement figured out, now I can move on to the ring height. Without the diameter of the objective bell (that only some manufacturers publish) I can't tell how low I can go before I run the objective bell into the barrel or the ocular bell into the receiver. That is actually fairly easy to work out if I have dimensions, but very few publish any of that information. Once I know the required height, I have to guess if "low", "medium", or "high" is closest to my calculated number.

If scope manufacturers published tube diameter, objective bell diameter, objective bell length, tube length to turrets, length of turret island, length of tube to ocular bell, ocular bell length, and ocular bell diameter you could fit any scope to a rifle with reasonable confidence that it would fit.

If ring manufacturers published height data (mating surface to bottom of scope opening or to center of scope opening) there would be a lot less guessing.

Sure, if I don't care about eye relief, cheek weld, etc. I can grab any old scope, a set of high rings, smack it on center it up and tighten it down, but then I have to pull my head back to see anything, hover over the stock, and wonder why I can 't hit anything.
 
I want to agree because I went through this, but only out of my own stupidity. If I was smart I would have gone to a store and asked to see what fits.
 
OP-

stick with Warne rings. aside from being top quality they do provide the specs. they can also answer almost any question by phone. if you buy the wrong rings they will take care of you. for scope rings i can't say enough good things about Warne.
 
I thonk that technically you hate buying scope rings, rather than scopes.
They do provide specs, well the better ones do. The problem is theres not a manufacture standard.
Also some rings are measured to bottom,center,top from xyz.

Sometimes you need to email the manufacture. I hate that scope manufactures do not list the reticle subtensions even on simple cross hair models.
Just a few ways to figure out ring
hieght

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYnA1UJH5lU


Heres a chart, it does not help with your original issue of not knowing with out buying to measure the actual measurementmeasurement of objective housing and lens caps if needed/wanted.
 
Why don't scope and ring manufacturers provide dimensions? Real dimensions.

For rings, we get "high", "medium", or "low"... but what does that mean? How high? How low? Manufacture A's medium is taller than B's high.

For scopes, we get weight, overall length, objective lens diameter, maybe ocular lens diameter, tube diameter, but how long is the front bell? Rear bell? How long is the section of tube in front of and behind the turrets? Other diameters?

We are trying to mount an optical system the correct distance from the shooters face at the right height to line everything up. Numbers... I need numbers.

I am trying to put a scope on a CZ 527. I have very limited range of placement for the rings on the receiver. This also tends to put the scope somewhat farther back than I would like, so knowing how long the ocular bell is and how much tube is on either side of the turrets is kind of important.

I want the scope as close to the receiver as I can get it, so knowing what the diameter of the objective bell is (not the lens) and what the taper of the bell is so that I can figure out how close to the rifle I can get.

Then I have to find rings of the correct height based on "low", "medium", and "high".

I guess the expected method is to buy $5000 of scopes and rings to mix and match until you get the combination right.

I don't mind spending the money to get it right, I just don't want to spend money guessing at what might be right.

So, weak rant aside, does anyone have any suggestions for scope/ring combinations for a CZ 527 American?
To add to my other post CZ has probably given a lot of thought to the mount placement and what they think the average scope will mount with little issue.
Theres mounting options to correct scope placement, eye relief and such. Getting there is not always easy even with all the specs.
The 527 is a pretty compact rifle as it sits, right.
Also CZ probably has a fixed or low magX scope in mind for it? You may need a scope with a longer eye relief.
 
Last edited:
I have a Badger Ordnance mount and rings on my R700.

Check other sites and see what people are recommending and at least you will have a starting point.
 
I dont disagree at all. I just went through the same process with a precision rifle. Trying to figure out what the best height would be for your rifle, also at a height that will clear the bell, with no information is frustrating. And when rings are $150 for a set you dont want to buy the wrong ones. I scoured the internet and finally found some good info in the Amazon questions and feedback for the rings and scope i was fitting. I still ended up taking my best shot luckily it worked ok, even though i could have gone 1/8 lower.

They go hand in hand.

I know that on the rifle I have there is a very narrow range that the rings could go. This gives me a set spacing +- about 3/8 inch. The rear ring is effectively a fixed position as it is the shortest section of dovetail and has a recoil lug (assuming that it is used). With the rear ring fixed, the farthest forward I can place a scope would be with the ocular bell pushed forward against the rear ring. Almost no one publishes the size of the ocular bell so I can't compare scopes against this feature to determine where the end of the scope sits with respect to my eye and whether this is within the eye relief for the scope.

Next, depending upon how much tube there is between the ocular bell and the turrets, I may not be able to push the scope up to the rear ring because I would land the turrets on the forward ring. If I push the turrets up to the forward ring, how much more does that push the ocular bell towards me? I can't tell because they don't publish dimensions.

Assuming that I can get the above placement figured out, now I can move on to the ring height. Without the diameter of the objective bell (that only some manufacturers publish) I can't tell how low I can go before I run the objective bell into the barrel or the ocular bell into the receiver. That is actually fairly easy to work out if I have dimensions, but very few publish any of that information. Once I know the required height, I have to guess if "low", "medium", or "high" is closest to my calculated number.

If scope manufacturers published tube diameter, objective bell diameter, objective bell length, tube length to turrets, length of turret island, length of tube to ocular bell, ocular bell length, and ocular bell diameter you could fit any scope to a rifle with reasonable confidence that it would fit.

If ring manufacturers published height data (mating surface to bottom of scope opening or to center of scope opening) there would be a lot less guessing.

Sure, if I don't care about eye relief, cheek weld, etc. I can grab any old scope, a set of high rings, smack it on center it up and tighten it down, but then I have to pull my head back to see anything, hover over the stock, and wonder why I can 't hit anything.
 
I find it far more entertaining to ask on here (NES) instead of getting manufacturers specs online. That way, we can fill 5 or 6 pages with sideways arguments about "why are you using that brand of ring?", "why are you using that brand of scope?", "why are you scoping that rifle?", etc.


But, more to the point: CZ makes a nice set of proprietary rings for their rifles. Have you tried them?
 
I find it far more entertaining to ask on here (NES) instead of getting manufacturers specs online. That way, we can fill 5 or 6 pages with sideways arguments about "why are you using that brand of ring?", "why are you using that brand of scope?", "why are you scoping that rifle?", etc.


But, more to the point: CZ makes a nice set of proprietary rings for their rifles. Have you tried them?

Upon much fussing and fuming and looking at forum posts and pictures and videos and consulting the old gypsy woman in the woods I am going to try a Burris MSR Riflescope 4.5-14x42 in the CZ rings.

Based on pictures of a 527 carbine with a Burris Fullfiield II 4.5-14x42 with the note that the CZ rings worked fine, I was able to estimate that I could slide the scope forward enough (since I don't have a rear sight to contend with) and that it should sit low enough... provided that the Fullfield line and the MSR line are similar in size and shape (which they appear to be)

My math says the objective bell would sit -0.050 inches from the top of the receiver. Since the front bell is out over the barrel which is lower than the receiver, this should work. We will see.
 
Back
Top Bottom