Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

Help with scope choice!

625 11
I'm wanting an AO scope for my incoming CZ 452... I don't want a really large objective or overly long scope because of the 16" barrel. So far I've been looking into:

Clearidge Ultra RF
Burris Timberline 4.5-14
Weaver RV-9

any others I should be looking into? anyone have experience with any or all of these and can eliminate one based on their experience? I have a Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40 on my 30-06 encore, and a Burris Fullfield 4.5-14x42 on my .223 encore, and I have been more then impressed with them so far in every respect. I can also use the Ballistic reticle on the burris and figure out what distances that correlates to on a .22 lr which would be handy...so I'm leaning toward the Burris, but your imput would be very much appreciated!!! Thanks in advance!
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
I bought the Weaver for a 10/22 that I'm building up as a classic 9/10 scale "big game" rifle. I bought it for it's quality as a hunter/plinker and for it's proportion to the rifle and not for a target scope. I haven't mounted it yet because I'm still waiting for the new factory contour barrel. So far just playing with it I'm impressed. It's bright and clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
868 Posts
You might want to look into a Leupold 3-9 X 33 EFR scope. It is a Compact ultralight that has a 33mm objective lens, weighs 11 ounces and is 11.3 inches long. It's one of Leupolds finest scopes of it's type not to mention having a lifetime warranty. It might be a little more then the scope you mention but it is dollar for dollar the best scope you can buy in my opinion.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,298 Posts
because of the 16" barrel. So far I've been looking into:

Clearidge Ultra RF
Burris Timberline 4.5-14
Weaver RV-9

Thanks in advance!
All three are good, but I would say it is down to features.

As Jee said, the Clearidge has the target style knobs. If your going to be doing a bit more range work at various distances, that would be an advantage. Also the higher power Burris will also help in the range work.

If your doing close in hunting (50 yards or less)), the lower 3x power is better with a FOV increase of almost 100% more by linear diameter, over the Burris @4.5X (17 [email protected] Burris VS 33 [email protected] for Clearidge @ 100 yards). If you will be doing long range hunting, the ballistic plex reticle might be helpful for bullet drop, however that would mean working at 14X to get the scales to work, and that is too high a power for "normal" hunting conditions that I am use to (woods walking). The 14X would require some sort of gun rest, be it bipod, or prone position. I guess one could operate at 7x (or lower) and compensate all the bullet drop readings, but that would probably mean the first tick would be at about 100 yards @ 7x, if the scope is zeroed at 50 yards.

All, said, I would probably be leaning towards the Clearidge with standard duplex for hunting. Built by the top Asian riflescope maker, Light Optical Works, Japan. If you have any problems, the guys at The Optic Zone (owners of Clearidge) will give you personal service to make sure you are happy. The Optic Zone is a sponsor and contributor on RFC. Mueller is another sponsor on RFC, and they too will provide that "personal" service if you have any problems.

An aside. The Burris Timberline 4.5-14X has a control range speced at 30 MOA in 2008 catalog. That is very small compared to the competition (Clearidge is 50 MOA, Weaver is 60 MOA). There might be some good news, in that one of the first buyers of this scopes has reported 446 clicks total on adjustment range, which is about 55 MOA (1 click = 1/8 MOA for Timberline 4.5-14x). I believe he is going to test the control range the next time he is at range. If he is right, then Burris has made another error in their catalog literature (they also said closest focus is 7 feet when it is 7 yards, and have been sending out fine plex scopes out in boxes marked Ballisticplex). Furthermore, another new Timberline owner apparently measured his fine plex inner crosshairs, and it is at least 2 times larger than what 2008 Burris catalog specifications report @ 14x. These QA issues, if true, are very troubling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
thanks for the great post MGT. I am ashamed to say this, but I actually forgot about the BDC reticle being set up for the max power....which is not something I want on a carry around rig like I want. I think the clearidge sounds like a good scope, I like the target turrets.....they can be rezeroed right? I really wouldn't mind a fixed power around 4x but I can't find a fixed power scope with AO which I have grown to love.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,298 Posts
I really wouldn't mind a fixed power around 4x but I can't find a fixed power scope with AO which I have grown to love.
You might not need AO for a low power scope. Something like the Natchez Weaver Shotgun 4x 32mm with duplex reticle for $79 at Natchez would make a great scope. The focus/parallax is set @ 50 yards. With that low power, the depth of field probably has everything from 25 to 100 yards in focus. Using the parallax error equation, maximum parallax would be:

1. 32*.5* (50-25)/50 = 8 mm = .31 inches @25 yards
2. 32 *.5*(100-50)/50 = 16 mm = .63 inches @100 yards

One thing that sets this Weaver Shotgun scope apart from every other 4x scope is it has the largest elevation/windage control range I have seen in a 4x scope, @120 MOA. It was not uncommon to see this scope selling for close to $180 about 2 years ago, and was typically $40 more than the Weaver K4 and $60 more than the Weaver R4. I suspect its high price for a 4x scope turned many people away, hence the reason it was discontinued.

The Clearidge would still be the better scope choice if you are doing both casual target and hunting, but a fixed 4x scope might be the best thing if you were doing hunting only.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I have heard many good things about the weaver shotgun scope! I do plan do use this gun for target and hunting so something that could do both would be nice. I have a 3-9x40 tasco on my 10/22 currently and while hunting, it always stays on 3x, and it is nice to have that 9x for target shooting, although the parallax issue become abundantly clear at 25 yards. I think if I go with a simple plex reticle I would like to have target turrets for adjusting for the yardage- so the clearidge seems to have everything I need. How does the clearidge compare to the simmons 22mag AO scope and weaver AO rimfire scope?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
How does the clearidge compare to the simmons 22mag AO scope and weaver AO rimfire scope?
After looking through both I can say the Clearidge is much better optically than the Simmons. All the testing I've done with the Clearidge I mounted on a Weatherby shows all the adjustments to be precise, accurate, and repeatable. As far as comparing to the Weaver the only thing I can say with certaintity is the Clearidge has resettable turrets where the Weaver does not. For what it's worth, I'm very happy with the Clearidge and would by another. Hope this helps.

Goat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
well, I got out my 4.5-14x42 Fullfield II on my encore .223 out today. I put a piece of 1" graph paper 20 yards away and turned the scope down to 4.5x zoom. The Timberline 4.5-14x32 AO should have the same reticle according to Burris. The results make me want the burris again. With the crosshairs on the top edge of the paper, the 200 yard notch was .75" down, the 300 yard notch was 2" down, the 400 yard notch was 3.25" down, and the 500 yard notch was 5" down (measurements from top of page). Which means the bullet's trajectory crosses at these points:

standard ammo (1250 fps)
crosshairs- 20 yds and 59 yds
200 yd notch- 70 yds
300 yd notch- 82 yds
400 yd notch- 92 yds
500 yd notch- 102 yds

subsonic ammo (1080 fps)
crosshairs- 20 yds and 52 yds
200 yd notch- 63 yds
300 yd notch- 73 yds
400 yd notch- 82 yds
500 yd notch- 91 yds

these are all approximate....but I like the way this worked out. Someone that is more knowledgeable about this stuff check my math.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top