Scope for a CZ 452 Lux .22LR?
- Thread starter CV32
- Start date
What do you plan to do with the gun? 3-9 x 40 is a good starting point. More power if you shoot targets, AO or side parallax adjust as well if you shoot target. If you hunt, high power and adjustable objective can be a detriment.
It will be a mix of plinking, target shooting and hunting. My experience with CZ rifles is that high rings are usually needed to get good clearance from the bolt, though in this case it will likely be more to clear the (very nice) iron sights.
I'm familiar with the advantages/disadvantages of high power, adjustable objectives, etc, etc. A cheap 3x9x40 was what I had on my Rem 597, though I've put a red dot on it now, since it will likely be relegated to plinking now that the CZ is in the arsenal.
The CZ seems to cry out for something a little nicer. Guess I was just wondering what people were putting on their own CZ 452's?
I'm familiar with the advantages/disadvantages of high power, adjustable objectives, etc, etc. A cheap 3x9x40 was what I had on my Rem 597, though I've put a red dot on it now, since it will likely be relegated to plinking now that the CZ is in the arsenal.
The CZ seems to cry out for something a little nicer. Guess I was just wondering what people were putting on their own CZ 452's?
I have a Mueller APV 4.5-14x40 on Leupold rings (high?) on my CZ 425 American. On lower power settings its good for gophers, and on 14x its reasonable, but a compromise, for trying to print a tight group at 50 yards. I just put a Bushnell ebay special 6-24x50 on a target 22 and while that's not suitable for gophers close up, it will assist in paper punching at 50 yards.
I've got a bushnell banner 4-12x40 with ao on mine. I've been happy with it. I've seen a lot of reviews on rimfire central from guys who like the Mueller APV on theirs. Problem is they are about $200 in Canada whereas I was able to get the above locally for just over $100.
My dream scope for mine is a Nikon Monarch 4-16 SF. Probably not 100% ideal for either - but 4 is low enough for small critter hunting duties, and 16 is high enough for target shooting at 22LR ranges. I pick the Nikon, because after having done a side-by-side comparison at Cabelas of a bunch of scopes in that class (Elite 4200's, VXII's, etc) - looking at sheep mounts from about 75 yards away - the Nikon was very noticeably better glass.
My Model 4 BRNO heavy bbl has a Tasco 4-12???? AO - the $100 scope -- in Lynx rings works great for the gophers in the spring at long ranges
My 452 has an old Weaver 4x in BKL rings -- also very very good for gophers and general hunting (overall much better then the specialized heavy Model 4)
My 452 has an old Weaver 4x in BKL rings -- also very very good for gophers and general hunting (overall much better then the specialized heavy Model 4)
- Location
- Alberta Free State
My 452 in .17HMR is using a Muller APV 4-14. A nice scope, but I prefer the Bushnell Banner 6-24x40 I have on my BRNO Model 4. I tried a Banner 6-18x50 on the .17HMR and it was also pretty good, but it's very hard to find rings that give good clearance for a 50mm objective.
My vote for an all 'rounder on a budget would be the Banner 6-24x40. You can back it off for gophers & other varmints, and still get a good clear sighting of paper targets at 100 yards.
If you're not on a budget, the Busnell Elite 4200 series has a nice 6-24x40, and the Elite 3200 series has a really nice 5-15x50 with target turrets and a mil-dot reticle.
If you're looking at Leupold, you can't go wrong with the VX-II or VX-III series.
My vote for an all 'rounder on a budget would be the Banner 6-24x40. You can back it off for gophers & other varmints, and still get a good clear sighting of paper targets at 100 yards.
If you're not on a budget, the Busnell Elite 4200 series has a nice 6-24x40, and the Elite 3200 series has a really nice 5-15x50 with target turrets and a mil-dot reticle.
If you're looking at Leupold, you can't go wrong with the VX-II or VX-III series.
cdnredneck_t3
Regular
On my 452 silhouette I have a Tasco Target & Varmint 2.5-10 X 42. As far as bang for your buck ($70) goes these are great. They have a mill dot reticle, front adjustable parallax and target knobs. For an all around scope it is perfect because it has an accurate range of 5 feet to 100 yards. I know Tasco glass is not that great but try it out and decide if you like that style of scope and then buy a 3200 or VX-II when you want to upgrade like I am going too. But in my opinion a good .22LR scope must have adjustable objective and a minimum of 4x magnification to shoot accurately when a gopher pops up 10 feet away.
B,
That rifle would look great with the Leupold VXI 2-7x28 IMO
. Just wish it was from the VXII line.
D
That rifle would look great with the Leupold VXI 2-7x28 IMO
. Just wish it was from the VXII line.D
Last edited:
Mine has a Leupold 4x Rimfire compact scope. The gun is accurate enough to justify more scope power, but the little four-power sits nicely with low rings. The front of the scope is just behind the rear sight, and scope/bolt clearance is just barely enough. It makes for a perfectly well-balanced and good-looking combination.
B,
That rifle would look great with the Leupold VXI 2-7x28 IMO
D
D, I've been considering the Leupold line. Maybe the VX-II 2-7x33?
I would. Parallax set for 100 would be the only possible downside, if that matters to you. Wouldn't to me, for a mainly hunting 22RF anyways. I might even get it with the LRD reticle, just for fun.
Couple of summers ago me and a friend put those 3200 10x40 Mildots on our 22s for gophers. It was alot of fun, proper parallax or not. We smacked alot of gophers way out there, for 22s. Kinda fun taking the shot and waiting/talking till the impact.
IMO, those CZs shouldn't have a great big, adjustable AO scope sitting on top. Doesn't fit......
The front bell of the scope sits just barely behind the irons. I tried a lot of combinations to find this one, because the height of the rear sight would force me to put the scope way too high if it extends that far forward.
