Scoping a 452 UL

[Rock-it3]

I have a CZ 452 UL. I understand from the literature that the 452 UL is designed to be used open sighted, with the long barrel and the European stock design. Trouble is, my eyes are not what they used to be, and I do have trouble shooting as accurately as I would like with open sights. And the UL is so darn accurate, I hate not being able to get the accuracy out of it. It's not a 10/22, that can just be banged away with and hit the target based on the amount of lead going down range.
A list of questions:

1.) Have any of you scoped a 452 UL?

If so,
2.) With what setup? (scope, magnification, rings, ring height, etc.)
3.) How is the cheek weld, eye relief, etc. with the European stock design?
4.) Any modifications required to the bolt handle?
5.) What were your results? Were/are you happy with the setup, accuracy, comfort, etc.?

General questions:
6.) Does the long barrel give any accuracy advantage when scoped, or is the only advantage the sight radius?
7.) Is a shorter, heavier barrel just as accurate as a longer barrel?
8.) I have read the long barrel actually reduces the projectile velocity because all of the powder in a 22lr case hase been burned before the projectile leaves the barrel, and then friction slows the projectile somewhat. Does this affect accuracy at all?

My reason for asking these questions is, I am debating selling the 452 UL and picking up a 457 (Varmint, maybe, with the haevy barrel) and putting a scope on it. But I really do like the UL, so I am looking for input in order to make a decision.

Thanks all.

[wagon]

I think you should keep the 452, which I prefer over the 455/457 with ?screwed on? barrel ...  but that?s just me.   After all, you children / grandchildren will thank you some day in the future for keeping the 452.

My eyes are old too, I scope every rifles I have.   For those CZ models that have a rear sight, it will either limit the length of your scope, or, require higher scope rings to clear the sight ...  how high the rings you need depends on the size of the Objective.   I do not have UL but do have a Trainer, have played with different options, as well as scope+rings combination.

I have tried removing the rear site to accommodate a 44mm objectives (it was a 18x Mueller scope, IIRC), and I have tried a shorter / smaller scope (a Leupold 3-9x 33mm EFR) with the rear sight in place.   

You would need to, first, decide which scope do you want...   eg Vortex, Nikon has big arse eye box that will limit you to use low rings..  but you can add some weaver adapter to the dovetail to gain height for clearance...

If for paper punching / bench shooting for accuracy, you would want some higher power scope , like 16x or 18x ..  or even more.   For plinking/ hunting .. folks tend to stay within 2-7 or 3-9 ,,,  and anything in between.    As always, our budget will limit what we end up with.

Personally I think the new Leupold Freedom series has very value..  glass is better than the old VX-2 series.   I also find that Weaver Grand Slam series has very good optics, Natchez.com has Weaver scopes on sales from time to time, be sure to check them out, sometimes their sales price is better than buying a used one.

On cheek weld, I use stock packs, I like those from Eagle Industries.   I can put additional foam underneath it as well.   Triad Tactical stock packs come with additional inserts.   

You are correct on barrel length, longer barrel tends to help velocity...   people tends to believe that for 22LR, ?optimal? lengths is within 16? - 18? (IIRC), the shorter the more rigid, the less harmonic effect.   But then...  CZ 452 American and FS is 22? but they are (mostly) known to be more accurate.

Accuracy varies from rifle to rifle, and also depends on the right dose of ammo.

Most time... I learned from mistakes ... but that?s the fun part.   LOL






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[david s]

Any chance a peep sight would work for you? Williams has aluminum peeps for air guns with 11mm dovetails for under 40 dollars if you shop around.

[AZ_CZ]

+1 on what Wagon posted.

Had a UL for a little while but realized I to suffer from CSS, Can't See Sights, and added scopes and stock packs to the UL and Trainer. Never got use to the long barrel. Just seemed like too much of a good thing. I don't shoot good enough to notice any accuracy difference with barrel lengths. Other factors like the trigger, scope, ammo or stock have a larger impact.

You might consider trading it for another model 452 (I am also a fan of the original) ULs always seem to be in demand.

[ben512]

Cz 452 Skinner sight works well. Also I like the older 6-24x40 tasco. Perfect for hunting and some intense bench

[Quail_hunter]

I have a CZ 452 UL. I understand from the literature that the 452 UL is designed to be used open sighted, with the long barrel and the European stock design. Trouble is, my eyes are not what they used to be, and I do have trouble shooting as accurately as I would like with open sights. And the UL is so darn accurate, I hate not being able to get the accuracy out of it. It's not a 10/22, that can just be banged away with and hit the target based on the amount of lead going down range.
A list of questions:

1.) Have any of you scoped a 452 UL?

If so,
2.) With what setup? (scope, magnification, rings, ring height, etc.)
3.) How is the cheek weld, eye relief, etc. with the European stock design?
4.) Any modifications required to the bolt handle?
5.) What were your results? Were/are you happy with the setup, accuracy, comfort, etc.?

General questions:
6.) Does the long barrel give any accuracy advantage when scoped, or is the only advantage the sight radius?
7.) Is a shorter, heavier barrel just as accurate as a longer barrel?
8.) I have read the long barrel actually reduces the projectile velocity because all of the powder in a 22lr case hase been burned before the projectile leaves the barrel, and then friction slows the projectile somewhat. Does this affect accuracy at all?

My reason for asking these questions is, I am debating selling the 452 UL and picking up a 457 (Varmint, maybe, with the haevy barrel) and putting a scope on it. But I really do like the UL, so I am looking for input in order to make a decision.

Thanks all.

Hi,
I have one in left hand and will never sell it. The reason is that the production process is way more traditional compared to the 455/457.
In my case I went for a medium height set of rings and the decision for that was the bolt clearance.
Used a nikon BDC scope and due to length of the tube I removed the iron sights and left the base.

Shoots MOA groups at 100 meters any day any ammo.
I hope this helps





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Quail_hunter]

This is a link to a forum that covers in extreme detail all scope / rings questions on CZ rimfire rifles.

I believe you will find a lot of good info there



CZ scope and ring reference
 https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?share_fid=25673&share_tid=336921&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Erimfirecentral%2Ecom%2Fforums%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D336921&share_type=t


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wagon]

Shoots MOA groups at 100 meters any day any ammo.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

MOA (100 m) Including Remington Cyclone and Thunderbolt?   you gotta be the one unbelievable luckiest 452 owner!!!!

Or...  do you actually mean ?any ammo in your collection? ?     Mind to share what are those?





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Quail_hunter]

Shoots MOA groups at 100 meters any day any ammo.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

MOA (100 m) Including Remington Cyclone and Thunderbolt?   you gotta be the one unbelievable luckiest 452 owner!!!!

Or...  do you actually mean ?any ammo in your collection? ?     Mind to share what are those?





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wagon
I live in Switzerland and shoot mostly ammo that is available in this part of the world. I shoot the pistol match for 50 meters and the other for 100 meters.
It always needs some adjustment of the scope to match each ammo but once it?s done the rifle is consistent.
The target shown was with the RWS high velocity at 100 meters.







 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wagon]

Not just the skills + equipment that matters, the batch to batch  / round to round consistency of the ammo has big influence if the gun can shoot MOA ?any day? with ?any ammo?.

Here in the US we have al cheap I that shoots craps even at 25 yds  ?any day?, they are like ?MOA at 25 yds?.  LOL.   

Just want to help OP to set appropriate expectation..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Quail_hunter]

Wagon
You are doing the right thing asking me to clarify.
There was some exaggeration using ?any? but at the same time with the ammunition shown and few others that I do not stock I had similar results without difficulty after zeroing the reticle.
And I am not an expert.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rock-it3]

Quail_hunter, thanks for the pics of your set-up. Sorry I didn't check back into this thread for a while, it sort of slipped my mind. I just picked up a Nikon Prostaff 4-12 x 40 BDC on clearance for $160 at a local shop. I just ordered a set of medium height Warne rings, so I figure I may have to remove the front sight, but that's fine. I'll post some pics after the rings arrive and I can get the scope mounted.

[viking499]

If the scope is shorter than 11 - 11 1/4" long, it will fit behind the sight without having to remove it.

[Rock-it3]

If the scope is shorter than 11 - 11 1/4" long, it will fit behind the sight without having to remove it.

It's not, actually it is just over 14" long. I was concerned about it, but I couldn't pass up what seemed to be a pretty good deal, and decided to buy it knowing I could remove the rear sight if I had to. They had a few 3-9 x 40's there, which is significantly shorter, but the 4-12 was only $10 more.

[Jiva]

I think you should keep the 452, which I prefer over the 455/457 with ?screwed on? barrel ...  but that?s just me.   After all, you children / grandchildren will thank you some day in the future for keeping the 452.

I agreed completely about the 452.

BTW Wagon, before seeing your pic I thought I had fully suppressed my urge to get a 512... "thanks a lot" lol