CZ 550 (416 Rigby) - Scope Mounting (Having Trouble with a Swaro)

[KDF]

I had previously posted to get some recommendations on an LPVO scope for my CZ 550 (thank you for all the great input). I opted for the Swarovski 6i 1-6x24 on Talley quick release rings. When sighting in, the elevation adjustment would bottom out before I could raise the the point of impact to zero (I could only get to about 5 inches low at 100 yards).

I researched the elevation adjustment ranges for a number of scopes:

• Swarosvski 6i - 74 MOA
• Leupold VX6 - 110 MOA
• Trijcon Accupoint - 110 MOA

I have concluded that unless I want to install a 20 MOA rail, that I will need to sell my Swaro and buy another scope. I have called Swarovski, Talley, and a gunsmith, and everything seems to point to the Swaro not working for this rifle. The other scopes should be able to get me to zero with room to spare. Has anyone run into to this issue? Please tell me I am making some type of obvious mistake.

 

[Rare Breed]

I have had six Swaro with two not being able to adjust enough horizontal so I sold them all and bought Leupold which have more adjustment

 

[Green Chile]

Have you considered the Burris signature rings that have inserts to add MOA within the ring? I used those for years with good results.

 

[Mark Biggerstaff]

I will say that is a common problem with CZ 550 and Swarovski. Been thru that with 3 of my CZs. Swaro does not have as much internal adjustment especially if the barrel and receiver are not true to each other. Leupold will have enough to solve the problem. I have same issue with current 458 Lott AHR 2 upgrade. Even Wayne said unless he pulled the barrel and trued it was 50/50 if Swaro would work. So I went Leupold VX6 Patrol 1-6. Have had no issues with it last 4 safaris

 

[Firebird]

The 20 moa rail will work for you-is there a reason you don’t want to go that route?
Being curious-not critical

 

[KDF]

The 20 moa rail will work for you-is there a reason you don’t want to go that route?
Being curious-not critical

I appreciate the comment. It is not an ideal solution for a couple of reasons: 1.) it will raise the scope by maybe 1/2 inch (it is perfect now), and 2.) I have quick release rings and I also have a RMR sight on a quick release base (I hate to loose the option to swap out the sight).

 

[Luvthunt]

Leupold and the RMR sounds like a good way to go. Good luck.

 

[Nhoro]

I think the problem may be with the Cz action bridges. An action should mount a scope approximately to zero with a bit of zeroing to do. That said, a change of scope is probably your simplest solution.

 

[Dirtdart]

Some of the early CZ-550's in calibers .375 and larger had an issue with either the bridges or barrel alignment or both? I could never get the shop that was handling their warranty work at the time to tell me. I was told send it in and we will fix the problem. The warranty work took care of the problem.

When I first ran into this I was using Talley rings, and if memory serves, a Swarovski scope.
Talley told me that they had run into this problem numerous times and it was not their rings. Talley also told me that the only scope thus far that they had found with enough adjustment to compensate was the Leupold VX-3 1.5-5 which for me was an unacceptable solution. I would second what @Nhoro said that the simplest solution is to change scopes and see where that gets you.

Been there and done that. It sucks I know.

 

[KDF]

Fellas, I think you nailed it. I am. Pretty sure the issue is with the CZ action and/or with the barrel.

I spoke to Richard Near at Near Manufacturing (he makes just about perfect integral scope mounts). He thought the issue might actually be with the barrel - the process of manufacturing the integral iron sights creates a bowing in the barrel.

The solution is to either raise the rear mount or go with a scope that has more elevation adjustment.

 

[Nhoro]

My Cz came with the front sight soldered at an angle- easily visible to the naked eyeThe gunsmith sorted it by heating the solder up and centering it. A little irritating on the quality control but my rifle is now dead on with iron sights. I don't know how you would measure the dovetails on the action vs bore. Maybe a gunsmith can centre the Bore line and measure the dovetail ? But I am sure a scope with more adjustment is cheaper. They are good Shooters despite the dodgy quality control.

 

[Rem700stw]

I have been following this thread with some trepidation having recently swapped out a Trijicon for a Swarovski 6i on my CZ 550 in 416 Rigby. Sunday afternoon I began the zeroing process. Long story short I achieved vertical zero on literally the LAST click left on the dial. That was a close one.

I consider myself lucky as I do not enjoy the 416 Rigby from a bench. Perhaps it is my imagination, but I consider it brutal and much prefer my 404, 450-400, 470, and 458 Lott in terms of recoil. All my other 40 and up rifles deliver a push. The 416 delivers a blow.

Back to sticks!

 

[KDF]

I have been following this thread with some trepidation having recently swapped out a Trijicon for a Swarovski 6i on my CZ 550 in 416 Rigby. Sunday afternoon I began the zeroing process. Long story short I achieved vertical zero on literally the LAST click left on the dial. That was a close one.

I consider myself lucky as I do not enjoy the 416 Rigby from a bench. Perhaps it is my imagination, but I consider it brutal and much prefer my 404, 450-400, 470, and 458 Lott in terms of recoil. All my other 40 and up rifles deliver a push. The 416 delivers a blow.

Back to sticks!

I am glad it worked out for you. What type of rings are you using on the 416?

 

[Rem700stw]

I cannot recall if that set is from Alaska Arms or Talley. I will have to look after work tonight to be sure.

 

[Rem700stw]

I had no "issues" with the prior Trijicon. It was a 1-4 Accupoint. I just wanted a little more magnification and after looking through the Swarovski 8i on my 375 I purchased the 6i used at an online auction site.

 

[Rem700stw]

Just checked the rifle. It has Talley QD rings.