Scope for anschutz 1727??????????????

R

Rigster

Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
New to the site and forum but a lot of you guys really know you stuff so here is a question.

I have an Anschutz 1727 17hmr on the way and although I find it very easy to buy rifles that I like scopes are a challenge. The rifle will be used at the range and hunting small game.

I'm not wanting to go cheap on the scope and the Swarovski Z5 5-25x52 with the ballistic turret and 4w reticle has me interested so you know the price range I'm looking at. My thinking is if/when(highly doubtful) I get bored of the swaro on the rifle I may use it double duty with a 308?

Let hear your suggestions and also what reticle to choose?
 
I put a Swarovski Z5 5-25x on my 1727F, and I absolutely love the combo!

Only downside to my setup is that my scope has a super fine crosshair, so it can be difficult to see with dark backgrounds. I love the fine crosshair for target shooting though! And considering what I use the rifle for hunting, I don't need any fancy reticles with windage or elevation marks......but that's just me.

I love this rifle for so many reasons, and it is likely the most accurate firearm I currently own!

IMG_2160_zps0fae48bd.jpg
 
Thanks for the reply, slick looking set up.
I'm torn between the plex and the 4w. What height rings did you use? and did you use the bases that came on the rifle? I'm leaning towards talley and their bases. I hear ya on the accuracy because I have a 1517 with a leupold VX1 6-18 and can easily shoot the #### off a bee at 100. I really spoiled myself when I bought my first anschutz but I'm not complaining.

Thx for the response
 
Hey rigster . 1727 fortner is a stunner.
I just mounted several scopes and have compared the ring setups, in case that is something you may need. Talley is what over half the folks over at RFC have on their Annies. The other half use BKL. I have both and would go either way. The talleys mount into the pre-drilled holes, but the BKL ones have a chamfered edge that is easier on the scope finish and offer more variability on eye relief.
Regarding your main question, you may wish to take a look at Schmidt and bender. I love my Swarovski (on a 1710), but these guns are so freaking accurate that big magnification is not overkill, and big magnification needs the best glass you can get. Just make sure you get AO, you will kick your butt if you dont. If money is no object, get a March.
 
ssapach said:
I put a Swarovski Z5 5-25x on my 1727F, and I absolutely love the combo!

Only downside to my setup is that my scope has a super fine crosshair, so it can be difficult to see with dark backgrounds. I love the fine crosshair for target shooting though! And considering what I use the rifle for hunting, I don't need any fancy reticles with windage or elevation marks......but that's just me.

I love this rifle for so many reasons, and it is likely the most accurate firearm I currently own!

IMG_2160_zps0fae48bd.jpg
Click to expand...

I love that gun. I wanted to buy one when i seen one at prophet river. I ended up buying 2 anschultz (.22 and .17) instead.
 
If in your price range, the Swaro 5-25 4w would be as perfect as you could have, even the plex if you prefer but the 4w allows more target in view. fine but not too fine to see in the field. if you did get it, would you ever have a great rig!!!!!
 
The AO is a must,I have a 1517 with a 6-18x40 and I wish I went bigger on that one so I am expecting big things from the 1727. I'm not ready to jump on the March wagon yet so the Z5 seems to be the one I'm leaning towards. I'm in Vancouver and I haven't come across Schmidt&Bender to do a hands on but I'll search a tad more. I have swaro's on a couple centerfires and the truth is that they turned me into a harsher than need be critic of scope's.
 
Rigster said:
What height rings did you use? and did you use the bases that came on the rifle?
Click to expand...

Couldn't tell you what height the rings are off the top of my head, but I had P&D mount everything for me. And yes, just used the bases that came with the rifle.

I've had it a little over a year now, and probably fired close to 1000 rds through it (if not more) and haven't had a single issue yet! Perhaps 1k rds a year isn't much to some people, but I don't necessarily go shooting each month even.
 
The gun arrived today in spite of Canada Post frustrating the hell out of the process. I'll do pictures when as soon as i can and except for a minor ding in the stock (presumably from Canada Post kicking it all the way from Alberta) its a nice looking piece of kit.
 
Take the step up to the March--the 2.5-25x42mm.:

CFuq2MVl.jpg


Far superior in a lot of ways to the Swarovski (I have both, or at least the March and one Swarovski--the Z5 3.5-18x44). For one thing, with the March, you can focus and dial out parallax, with the side focus, down to 10 yds. With the Swarovski, the lowest you can go with this is 50 m. (or 55 yards). For another thing, the objective bell OD is 2.0" vs. 2.30" for the Z5, and the March's length is a reasonable 12.4", compared with 14.6" for the Z5. A 14.6" scope with a 2.3" objective bell is just too out-of-proportion for any rimfire rifle; it tends to overpower the rifle. The March looks as if it belongs on the gun. Finally, you have a much better bottom end with the March, giving you a 42-ft. field of view at 100 yards when on 2.5 power. The Swarovski, at its bottom end of 5-power, gives you a 21.9-ft. field of view at 100 yards. And power at the top end is identical. So if hunting is on the agenda, there's just no comparison between the two scopes. The 17 HMR is a fairly short-range hunting cartridge, and much of your hunting for squirrels, for example, will be thick cover and at shorter ranges. The March lets you focus down for these kinds of hunting situations; the Swarovski, not so much.

I'm not dissing Swarovski; I've owned several and currently have the Z5 3.5-18X44. Swarovski scopes are very good; March scopes are just better. If you go with the Swarovski, my recommendation would be the Z5 3.5-18X44. It's a little shorter than the 5-25, is lighter, and has an objective bell whose OD is right at 2.0". It will look better on your Anschutz, and it will give you the kind of bottom end you need in a lot of situations: a 35-ft. field of view. Unless you plan to use your 1727F for benchrest shooting almost exclusively, a top end of 18-power is completely adequate.

Edit: One other thing. Be sure not to go cheap on the mounts. I got the Talley steel bases for my 1727F (which has the March scope on it), and the steel fixed rings (30 mm. in my case). They are handsome mounts, and your 1727F deserves no less. It's just my opinion, but I abhor aluminum mounts on classy rifles. Other will feel differently.
 
Last edited:
Rigster said:
The gun arrived today in spite of Canada Post frustrating the hell out of the process. I'll do pictures when as soon as i can and except for a minor ding in the stock (presumably from Canada Post kicking it all the way from Alberta) its a nice looking piece of kit.
Click to expand...

No the ding is from when i seen the price tag, pretty much dropped it. Sorry
 
I put a Zeiss Conquest HD 3-15x42 on my 1727F.

Mounted in Talley rings on Talley bases made specifically for the 1727F.

V-e-r-y happy with the setup.

Clay at Prophet River got me all squared away.


 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom