Hi folks...wanted to introduce myself and say hello. I am interested in your opinions, I have a CZ550 in 375H&H. Right now I am using the factory iron sites. I have decided to scope the rifle for an african trip and have been getting conflicting advice regarding the benefits or shortfalls of detachable mounts. Should I use a detachable, or scope the rifle and be committed to it? Interested in your thoughts.

Thans

There is nothing WRONG with QT mounts, so why not?



I use them even on rifles on which I will probably not need to remove the scope.

Get the QDW from leupold they are great I have them on my .375.
It is nice to have the option of shooting with the iron sights.

Cheers,

Andr�

One of the advantages of QDs is that you can have two scopes in QD rings pre-zeroed so that if one fails you have a ready backup, plus if you have a need to go to irons, it's quick and easy. Double redundancy and all that.

Steven,

You should go with EAW detachable mounts!
I use them on a CZ 602 ZKK (with a Leopold 3-9x50), in .375 H&H, and it sure works!
No need for fixed bases. When you take the scope off all the system comes off in one peace and when you put it back it always keeps its zero!.
The same mounts are used on the CZ550 (In fact I have bought one CZ550 yesterday, in 9.3x62 for night wild boar hunting, and will top it with a Zeiss 3-12x56, during next week).
I find EAW mounts more strong and reliable than any others (and I have mounts from several other manufacturers: US ones included).
But I suppose that availability can play an important role when it comes to chose what mounts to buy!

B.Martins

Does anyone use the Appel mount? They are fairly pricey but are very low, strong and return to zero every time.

You know, the best buy out there in a detachable mount is Leupold's QR mount. It's much better than their QRW mount, which is made for Leupold by Warne.

The Leupold QR is an extremely simple, clean, and wonderfully strong mount that will stand up to just about anything, and return to zero as well as anything else. I've had a OR setup on my .458 Win. Mag. for the last going-on ten years, and it's never bobbled......

AD

Boghossian,

The EAW mounts I am talking about are the same and only Ernest Apel mounts!.

B.Martins

I would not own a DGR without iron sights and QD mounts..I use Talleys and have them hand fitted, but the Leupolds are good also, but again I would hand fit them..I much prefer the Talleys to any of the rest..The EAWs seem to have a problem with heavy recoil in our camps, but Mr. Johansson told me that was because most were improperly mounted and were not hand fitted...

After trying them all, I will stay with Talley and I have them on all my rifles now...

I agree with all of the above. I have weaver bases and qd rings on my rifles and they work fine. They have a finger lever to loosen them so you dont need any tools. I also hear that the talley mounts a real good but have no personal experience with them. When my .375 comes in I might put talleys on it...Oh and welcome to the forum.

b.martins,

Could you post a pic of those Appel mounts on your rifle as I am considering fitting some to my CZ550...

Thanks

Pete

I use the QDW from leupold on my M70 416 Rem Mag. It is nice to have the option of shooting with the iron sights. If things get "tight" a flip of the lever and the open sites are ready for action.

I also have my backup scope equiped with the QD's, it is sighted in and ready for immediate use.

Steven,

The "usual" answer to this question is that decent open sights are better than scopes on a DGR when things get close up and personal.

Having said that, Finn Aagaard, one of the few writers I really respect, describes how he carried out some shooting tests which challenge this view.

Basically he would get some of his vistors to his ranch to shoot a rifle with open sights and again with low powered scope in a timed tests, and in the vast majority of cases they were quicker and more accurate using the low power scope.

In Aargaards Africa, Aagaard states that he had a .375H&H fitted with both open sights and a Weaver K2.5 scope, and used the scope exclusively even for following up wounded dangerous game.

I do agree that having a spare scope already zeroed in mounts makes sense especially when far from home but I would suggest trying a low powered scope set at x1.5 against your open sights before you decide which is "best"

Regards,

Pete

Talley is truly best for the CZ 550 magnum. The medium height QD Lever rings by Talley plus a Leupold 1.75X-6E is a sweet setup for anything a .375 H&H might be properly used for. Then the express sights will only be needed if you smash the scope, so they are nice to have in a pinch.

The Talley QD lever rings for the CZ 550 Magnum are a wonderful piece of art. Simple, rugged, and precise as possible. A "Best of Best" design.

You can use the Warne QD lever rings, or factory CZ rings (rigged with a hex screw for hex wrench in pocket, or add homemade levers too, as I have done)...

But nothing could possibly beat the Talley QD lever setup on a CZ 550 Magnum: rings for about $100 US and well worth it!

Talley ... simply magnificent on a CZ 550 Magnum integral base.

Talleys are super.

If only they'd make ANY Talleys in 30mm diameter to fit the CZ 550 like they used to--I like the Swaro and S&B low power variables, and have been using modified CZ rings because the Talleys only come in one inch diameter.

I'd buy them if they'd ever resume production of the 30mms.

.

Detachable mounts are nice. Personaly, I don't like levers. Most makers offer their mounts with an optional slotted knob.

Dave