idea for a CZ-858 hand guard

homer76

homer76

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
42   0   0
Location
Lower Mainland, BC
I'm just throwing an idea out there. Bear in mind I am not a machinist and have no means to make what I am about to propose...

I like red dots and I like back-up sights to go with them.

I own a CZ-858 and shoot corrosive ammo. I refuse to pay extra for non-corrosive so my rifle needs to be cleaned after every use.

It is for this reason I have never purchased one of the many replacement hand guards that are available. Despite the many claims that some hand guard uppers are repeatable I find it hard to believe. Right now all the hand guards also seem to be built as low as possible in order to allow red dot sights to co-witness with the existing iron sights found.

I am suggesting the opposite. Build a hand guard that is higher and even uses the rear sight mount (with rear sight removed) to make it more stable and gives us a longer top mount. I have copied a picture of a mount sold by Corwin Arms. If there was a space cut in the left side of the hand guard it would be possible to remove the piston for cleaning without removing the top hand guard.



Now to take it a step further, NEA (and before that Neit Arms) sold a railed stock adapter that was the same height as their upper hand guard. I was leery about buying one because I can't see a hand guard that needs to be removed being repeatable.

However, with a higher hand guard that does not need to be removed combined with a railed stock adapter that are the same height one could use a red dot with back-up iron sights. If the hand guard set could extend forward of where traditional hand guard sets end that would be a bonus......

Phew, now someone with skill and access to a machine shop just needs to build it....... Which might be possible given how innovative some of us on CGN are (just not me).
 
The vz/cz rifle was not designed for optics. What you propose will increase mechanical offset and require a cheek riser to work. That riser may or may not work with all stocks. Your proposition could work but it would come at a high cost and create other problems. The railed top covers return to zero for the most part. The rifle with reddot is accurate for what it is.

Tdc
 
? Whats wrong with the scope side mount scrwed into the receiver? Thats what I have! Yah you have to remove it to clean, but so what, I don't shoot corrosive, the cleaning can wait and It returns to zero. Yah I can't use my iron sights but so what I have a frigging aimpoint and a g33 magnifier on there, I don't need irons.
 
TDC said:
The vz/cz rifle was not designed for optics. What you propose will increase mechanical offset and require a cheek riser to work. That riser may or may not work with all stocks. Your proposition could work but it would come at a high cost and create other problems. The railed top covers return to zero for the most part. The rifle with reddot is accurate for what it is.

Tdc
Click to expand...

It wouldn't necessarily require a cheek riser. If the stock was in-line like an AR (and how the NEA stock adapter is) it wouldn't be too bad. The offset would be similar to an AR-15 and certainly nowhere as bad as the Type 97 NSR and the rail that M-14.ca is building. Since the stock is in-line instead of that weird angle it would help with muzzle flip since the recoil goes straight back into the shoulder.

mikethebike said:
? Whats wrong with the scope side mount scrwed into the receiver? Thats what I have! Yah you have to remove it to clean, but so what, I don't shoot corrosive, the cleaning can wait and It returns to zero. Yah I can't use my iron sights but so what I have a frigging aimpoint and a g33 magnifier on there, I don't need irons.
Click to expand...

The majority shoot corrosive. I'm glad you like the side mount but I like the idea of a longer rail system (and longer sight radius) to mount a red dot and back up iron sights

I'm just throwing an idea out there.
 
homer76 said:
It wouldn't necessarily require a cheek riser. If the stock was in-line like an AR (and how the NEA stock adapter is) it wouldn't be too bad. The offset would be similar to an AR-15 and certainly nowhere as bad as the Type 97 NSR and the rail that M-14.ca is building. Since the stock is in-line instead of that weird angle it would help with muzzle flip since the recoil goes straight back into the shoulder.



The majority shoot corrosive. I'm glad you like the side mount but I like the idea of a longer rail system (and longer sight radius) to mount a red dot and back up iron sights

I'm just throwing an idea out there.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying. You're trying to make a cz into an AR. The theory is sound but the cost is not. AR stock, sights plus the rail system. Your $700 rifle is now a $1200 plus rifle and that's before optics. The muzzle flip will always be somewhat present due to the operating system.

Aas for the side rail mount. It sucks big time! Zero cheek weld, horrible offset issues and the mount weighs a ton.

Tdc
 
TDC said:
Aas for the side rail mount. It sucks big time! Zero cheek weld, horrible offset issues and the mount weighs a ton.
Click to expand...

I know all about that with the cantilever mount that came with my second cz.

Incidentally for anyone interested it is for sale with a delightful ncstar optic mounted on top of it.
 
TDC said:
I see what you're saying. You're trying to make a cz into an AR. The theory is sound but the cost is not. AR stock, sights plus the rail system. Your $700 rifle is now a $1200 plus rifle and that's before optics. The muzzle flip will always be somewhat present due to the operating system.

Aas for the side rail mount. It sucks big time! Zero cheek weld, horrible offset issues and the mount weighs a ton.

Tdc
Click to expand...

I fond both of my distcover rails work excellent. Despite what the non owners of them say, theu hold zero just fine
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom