CZ 527 Leupold Scope Ring Issue

Flesh Eater

New member
I remember reading on a review that some people have issues with the rings not tightening up properly, and many said they turned the mounting plate 180 degrees. I tried it, and it doesn't work. The screw hole is too low to do this.

Has anyone had an issue with Leupold scope rings on a CZ 527 .17 Hornet? I can't see how to fix it without placing a shim between the mounting plate and the ring. As of right now they're canted, as if they're seating properly, but they are.

Love my CZ. Hate their ring set ups, and their $100 cost for CZ rings.
 
I have two sets of CZ rings (30mm and 1") for my 527 and both sets I have zero complaints.
Just to be clear, are you having problems with Leupold brand rings made for CZ 527? If so, contact Leupold.
 
Last edited:
To be clear I'm having issues with Leupold rings for a CZ 527. I'll try contacting Leupold and see what they say. I found a set of Warne rings on Brownells for a decent price. I need high rings as I've mounted a 3x9x50 scope and the high Leupold rings barely clear.
 
I'm using Leupold medium 30mm rings that are specifically for the CZ527 on my 527 Varmint 17 hornet and they have been great so far, no issues at all.

Also have a CZ 527 Varmint in 204 and I'm using the DIP Inc. picatinny rail with Weaver low 4-hole rings.

Both setups work great but using a pic rail does give you a little more flexibility which is why nearly all my rifles use a rail mounted scope setup.
 
Originally Posted By: Lefty SRHAnother option is a DIP base and then you use whatever ring you want.

I just bought a CZ 527 myself and was reading about these. How much height do they add to the integrated scope bases? The reason I'm curious is I may be putting a 1" tube optic on with a 50mm objective. Warne is saying I need high rings if I go with the CZ 527 specific rings. I really don't want to put high rings on and was hoping to maybe get away with the medium CZ 527 specific rings, or go this route with the rail and Warnes standard medium rings.
 
Last edited:
Doh! Right on the DIP base web page: Adds approximately .330" to the height of the action... just had to scroll down a bit further.
 
On my 204 CZ 527 Varmint I'm using the DIP Inc. rail with Weaver Low 4-hole 30mm rings with a Burris Veracity 4-20x50 scope and there is NO WAY I'd want it any higher, actually, I'd prefer it to be a little lower than it is. The Leupold medium height CZ 527 specific rings I'm using on my 17 Hornet with a Burris 4.5-14x42AO sits a little lower than my setup does using the DIP Inc rail.

Because I like a pretty solid cheekweld, I had to put an adjustable cheek piece on my 204 because the scope was just a little to high for my liking and these CZ 527's don't have a very high comb so whatever setup you go with, I'd go with the combo that keeps it as low as possible or you could have to lift your head up a little to see through the scope and, IMO, that doesn't lend itself to shooting a rifle consistently well when you're lifting up off the stock to see through the scope.
 
Ive got a 56mm Nightforce on my CZ and have plenty of clearance. But Im also using the 30mm CZ rings.
Whats so bad about CZ rings? Just to be clear, my rifle is a 527 American in .223
 
Last edited:
That's some very helpful information, B23. I'd prefer to just go with the Warne CZ 527 specific rings, but it's nice to have the mounting flexibility a rail provides.
 
Originally Posted By: Lefty SRH
Whats so bad about CZ rings? Just to be clear

Not a thing if you need high rings.

I run Warn med's....QD and Fixed....with zero problems.

Talley makes a nice set of split rings for their rimfires too.

NFngutS.jpg
 
I contacted Leupold directly and they only showed one set of rings for the 527 in their database, which are the medium rings. I called Midway and informed them of this and they swear the high rings fit (they don't). Needless to say I'm returning the rings and going with Warne's high rings from Brownells.
 
In most cases the high rings are needed because of the bolt handle. Some scopes like Leupold have a smaller ocullar section and may be able to clear the bolt handle with a lower set.
 
Originally Posted By: Lefty SRHIn most cases the high rings are needed because of the bolt handle. Some scopes like Leupold have a smaller ocullar section and may be able to clear the bolt handle with a lower set.

I'm running a Leupold scope, and it's close now, so hopefully the Warne rings still allow me to run the factory bolt handle.

CZ makes a nice rifle, but it's little things like the bolt handle and ring mounting that makes them frustrating. Why build a rifle that requires a scope, then design a bolt handle that makes it a challenge to mount a scope?!
 
Originally Posted By: Flesh EaterOriginally Posted By: Lefty SRHIn most cases the high rings are needed because of the bolt handle. Some scopes like Leupold have a smaller ocullar section and may be able to clear the bolt handle with a lower set.

I'm running a Leupold scope, and it's close now, so hopefully the Warne rings still allow me to run the factory bolt handle.

CZ makes a nice rifle, but it's little things like the bolt handle and ring mounting that makes them frustrating. Why build a rifle that requires a scope, then design a bolt handle that makes it a challenge to mount a scope?!

I hear that. I was having a heck of a time with my 455. The bolt would rub the scope, and high rings would put the scope way too high. Finally took an angle grinder to the bolt and shaved some metal off where it was rubbing. Then sanded it smooth and re-blued it. Works like a charm!!
 
Originally Posted By: Bad DawgOriginally Posted By: Flesh EaterOriginally Posted By: Lefty SRHIn most cases the high rings are needed because of the bolt handle. Some scopes like Leupold have a smaller ocullar section and may be able to clear the bolt handle with a lower set.

I'm running a Leupold scope, and it's close now, so hopefully the Warne rings still allow me to run the factory bolt handle.

CZ makes a nice rifle, but it's little things like the bolt handle and ring mounting that makes them frustrating. Why build a rifle that requires a scope, then design a bolt handle that makes it a challenge to mount a scope?!

I hear that. I was having a heck of a time with my 455. The bolt would rub the scope, and high rings would put the scope way too high. Finally took an angle grinder to the bolt and shaved some metal off where it was rubbing. Then sanded it smooth and re-blued it. Works like a charm!!

What irritates me is that you pay $400-$700 for these CZ rifles, some which don't have iron sights, then you have to order their special bolt handle for scope applications. Why the heck don't they just put the bolt handles for scopes on rifles without iron sights from the get go?! Marketing/money gimmick, obviously, but it's still irritating.
 
Originally Posted By: RePeteOriginally Posted By: Lefty SRH
Whats so bad about CZ rings? Just to be clear

Not a thing if you need high rings.

I run Warn med's....QD and Fixed....with zero problems.

Talley makes a nice set of split rings for their rimfires too.

NFngutS.jpg


Very helpful pic. Guessing these are all 40mm objectives?
 
I hear what youre saying. A high bolt equals high rings. About 6-8 months after I got my CZ I had the factory stock altered and had an adjustable cheek piece hardware installed. That mad ea huge difference in shooting comfort with the higher mounted stock.
Id post a picture of it but Im not real picture posting intrenet savy, lol
I do enjoy my CZ 527 LH and my 452 LH rifles.
 
Being new to CZ's I very well could be misunderstood on this but I thought it was only the older 527's had the bolt handle hitting the scope issue/s and all the new 527's that were sold in the last couple years had the new/improved bolt handle, yes???

Both of my CZ 527's are the newer versions and neither of mine are even close to hitting the scope with the bolt handle.

I, also, had to put an adjustable cheek piece on one of my 527's because with using the DIP Inc. picatinny rail and even the lowest rings I could get, it was still a little to high and I couldn't get good cheekweld. The adj. cheek piece I used is from Defensive Edge Rifles and is just a very simple inexpensive light weight setup that'll work on just about any stock with a straight comb, like the CZ's.

I have the one from Defensive Edge Rifles on multiple different guns.
https://defensiveedge.net/index.php/products?start=15
 
Back
Top