I got the CZ medium height rings. They were overpriced, realistically, (I think around $75, 4 or 5 years ago), but very well made.
With a Leupold VX-1, the front of the scope clears the tangent sight by a hair.
Thanks Grelmar,
These are what I had in mind, as I want some that have 2 screws per side.. How would they be if they were the high rings? Would there be a problem with having to stretch higher so you can look down the scope properly?
Most things now days are over priced, but sometimes you also get what you pay for..
Thanks
I think you would end up with the scope too high for a couple reasons.
1. With the drop-comb stock of the Lux, med height rings allow for a good cheek weld. The stock is designed for you to "get down" and line up with the tangent sights (which beat the pants off the new sights on the 455's), so any height above that starts to show, in terms of comfort. Med. height rings are still Ok, but high rings would probably be pushing it.
2. Height over bore. For most types of shooting, practical accuracy is a lot easier the closer the scope is to the bore axis. This is especially true for rimfire, as it makes it a LOT easier to figure out holdover.
I use Leupold Medium 11mm rings on my CZ and Annie rifles with 40mm objective scopes... the blued finish is MUCH nicer than CZ and they are lower than CZ medium rings... CZ makes their rings much to high in all sizes. I have never had the Leupold rings move or shift or lose POI. The top rifle is a 1416 with 3-9x33 EFR, the AO ring make the objective bell diameter close to the same as a 40mm scope. For info's sake, the bottom rifle is wearing a VX-2 6-18x40mm AO and required the high rings due to the AO barrel.
![]()
I think you would end up with the scope too high for a couple reasons.
1. With the drop-comb stock of the Lux, med height rings allow for a good cheek weld. The stock is designed for you to "get down" and line up with the tangent sights (which beat the pants off the new sights on the 455's), so any height above that starts to show, in terms of comfort. Med. height rings are still Ok, but high rings would probably be pushing it.
2. Height over bore. For most types of shooting, practical accuracy is a lot easier the closer the scope is to the bore axis. This is especially true for rimfire, as it makes it a LOT easier to figure out holdover.
I use Leupold Medium 11mm rings on my CZ and Annie rifles with 40mm objective scopes... the blued finish is MUCH nicer than CZ and they are lower than CZ medium rings... CZ makes their rings much to high in all sizes. I have never had the Leupold rings move or shift or lose POI. The top rifle is a 1416 with 3-9x33 EFR, the AO ring make the objective bell diameter close to the same as a 40mm scope. For info's sake, the bottom rifle is wearing a VX-2 6-18x40mm AO and required the high rings due to the AO barrel.
![]()
I use Leupold Medium 11mm rings on my CZ and Annie rifles with 40mm objective scopes... the blued finish is MUCH nicer than CZ and they are lower than CZ medium rings... CZ makes their rings much to high in all sizes. I have never had the Leupold rings move or shift or lose POI. The top rifle is a 1416 with 3-9x33 EFR, the AO ring make the objective bell diameter close to the same as a 40mm scope. For info's sake, the bottom rifle is wearing a VX-2 6-18x40mm AO and required the high rings due to the AO barrel.
Very, very nice rifles.. It seems that CZ tries to keep all their stocks close in wood grain patterns, I tried to find one with a ddifferent looking wood grain but have yet to come across one.. but when you get in to the 1200-2000$ range I guess you'd expect to have something with a beautiful grain..
Thanks for the input on the CZ rings.
Very, very nice rifles.. It seems that CZ tries to keep all their stocks close in wood grain patterns, I tried to find one with a ddifferent looking wood grain but have yet to come across one.. but when you get in to the 1200-2000$ range I guess you'd expect to have something with a beautiful grain..
Thanks for the input on the CZ rings.