Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Which 1” rings for a CZ-527?

The factory rings are too darn high and will be replaced by a lower set. Which ones? The scope is a Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40.
Leupold
Warne Permanent
Talley

Does is have a 11mm dovetail like the 457 ?

I'm partial to Warne or Leupold. Warne makes rings that will fit a 11mm or ⅜ just by flipping a clamp.

For a 40mm objective scope, you should probably go with a medium height.

Depending upon which bolt you have, clearance can be an issue. Mine wears Leupold's.

Ed, this is a fairly recent production rifle, I understand that the earlier ones have a bolt handle that needs high rings to clear the ocular.
Do you use the Leupold medium rings?

13mm dovetail

The bolt handle limits how low the rings can be, so there really isn't anything lower than "medium" height rings.

I have a CZ527 Kevlar Varmint. The lowest "regular" 1" rings I found are Burris "medium" rings (blued steel, very nice). They are slightly lower than Leopold "medium" rings (by about 0.050-0.070"). That's what I use.

The absolute lowest you can go is the Jim Calhoon "Hunker" option (may need their modified bolt lower bolt handle for extra cost).

http://jamescalhoon.com/
(need to hit "next" on bottom of page 4-5x to get to rings and modified bolt)

James Calhoon CZ 527 "HUNKER Mounts" .125 inches lower than factory. May require modified bolt handle.
$128.70

DPI Products makes a base that attaches to the CZ 527 action permitting "low" Weaver style rings, but there isn't any net ring height reduction.

I am satisfied with the Burris medium rings for my CZ 527.

Here is mine 527, 76239. Leupold 2-7
Factory Tikka vs cz

Dre beat me to the punch. i'd go factory teeker t3 rings or sportsmatch TO49C cz-527 specific rings.

Big Ed

I used Burris or Leupold CZ rings on mine

That bottom pic looks just like my 527 with factory rings and a Leupold 2.5-8😐 The ring height is my biggest complaint about an otherwise nice little rifle.

Why I got the tikka t3 rings. Hated the high CZs

Yes but on an early rifle.

Burris


best pic com

Difficult to see your mount height, you laid your gun on your pooch.

Yep. Look high to me though.

The medium height rings from Burris are as low as I've been able to go. You have that pesky bolt handle to contend with.

My 2-10 or 3-15 Tract Torics won't even work because of the large ocular.

Warne

Leupold rings on my 204

I have tried most of them except for tikka. I wanted heavy duty but not too high, weight was a factor as well. Warnes are too tall and are 6 oz's but probably the heaviest duty. I like how burris mounts and clamps but they are higher than I want. even the mediums. I have settled on leupold. They aren't without their fault in my view. IMO they don't inspire a ton of confidence in that one dinky screw holding the wedge on the dovetail. The first set of leupolds I had only had like .020 engagement on one side of the top of the reciever bridge. I bought a second set and those have over twice that. I also used JB weld to bed the rings to the receiver.

overkill I know but this gun gets bounced around alot. I have knocked the zero off twice by dropping it with the first leupold rings. YES I know my fault, but this gun goes dang near everywhere with me.

nice rifle snowboard, a bushnell elite and a CZ 527 go together like ketchup on fries.

IME, the lowest scope mount possible is the shown rail with low Weavers. It barely clears the new bolt handle, won't clear the older version.

DF