I recently picked up a 452 Varmint in 17 HMR. Now I need an optic to top it off with. My budget is $1000. Intended purpose is target shooting and critter control at < 200 yards. If you've got a 452 Varmint, feel free to post a pic of your setup.

What a fantastic rifle.

Wow!  That is beautiful!  I think I'd be tempted to go with a sleek fixed-power scope like a Leupold FXII-4x33 or 6x36.  I really like my 3x15 Zeiss but many of the "high-end" manufactures have acceded to the consumer demand for variable-power scopes and only make those.  

For about $350 you will have an awesome, clear, tough scope that will complement that sweet rifle and your hunting/target parameters!

Wow, that is a beauty!

I have two CZ rifles. One is a CZ 455 in .22lr with a Mueller 4.5-14x40 with an A/O scope on it. The rings I have are a little too high, so I need to replace them with a shorter set:



My other CZ is a 452 "Ultra Lux". This one is also a .22lr and has an old 3-9 Tasco scope on it, but it is still a tack driver:

If I go with a fixed power it'll be at least 10x. The SWFA SS 10x seems like a good choice.

I love that Trainer!

I have the 453 varminter. It has a Nikon Buckmaster 4-14x with mildot. It's 8 or so yrs old and I'm pretty sure it's not made anymore. It was just under $300 back then. Very accurate rig.

Holy shit! You won the wood lottery.


A lot of people buy Mueller scopes for their guns. I have a primary arms 4-16x44 on my 452 varmint.

Also, a lot of people, myself included, change the striker spring in the bolt, change the action screws from slotted screw heads to hex heads, yodave trigger kit, and get picatinny rails to mount scopes.

J&P

Dip products

Curious, what does changing the striker spring get you?

hex heads are self explanatory.

why are picatinny rails better than using factory slots and compatible factory scope rings?

Leupold scope and Timney trigger:

Picatinny rail allows you to use better quality rings that are available everywhere, from everyone, in every height.  Mine is EGW and it is a rock solid mount.  

I don't recall messing around with the striker spring, however, there are mods to the stock trigger to make it a little better.  Timney makes this much easier.

Changing the striker spring "can help with the lock time and improve firing pin strike and ignition" quoted directly from j&p's site. A lot of people on rimfire central talk about doing it and it helps. I can't remember off hand, but I'm sure if one were inclined to look around on that site it can be better explained.

Using picatinny rails is not better than using the factory slots, but it's also not worse. it's just more of a preference over the factory slots.

It doesn't hold a candle to the Turkish walnut stocks from CZ custom, but yeah I'm pretty fond of it myself.

Can you post a pic? It looks like the EGW rail sits a lot higher than the DIP rail. But I'm afraid the DIP rail's set screws will leave marks on the receiver.

Have you ever removed the DIP rail? Did the set screws booger up your receiver?

No, I never have. Probably should at some point. I never thought to put loctite on the screws years ago.

Right now I think the Leupold VX2 scopes are the best bang for the buck.  They have finger adjustable 1/4 MOA turrets and the optics are what used to be in the VX-III scopes.   The optics are sharp and clear with excellent color and brightness.

My preference on my long range .22 LR rifles is the VX2 3-9x40 (one of those is on the CZ 453 American below).  The 150 yard parallax correction is well suited to the 100-250 yard shooting I do with them, and the 3-9x power range is ideal.  At 3-4x it will focus well at short ranges and the parallax error is minimal if you've got it properly mounted.  At 9x the sharp optics and excellent resolution allow you to easily see plates, paper targets and small critters. And it's not overly large for a CZ rimfire.

I prefer the 3-9x40 format to the 3-9x33 EFR, in part because the large 40 mm objective improves the image brightness a bit and I've noted the optics are better in the 3-9x40. Unless you're doing something that requires 9x at 10-15 yards, there's also zero benefit to the EFR feature.    


Here's my "wood lottery" CZ 453 (and my CZ 453 American in the last picture).

That's a beautiful Varmint! What rings are you using?

I'm using Burris Signature Z rings with 10 and 20 MOA inserts for a total of 30 MOA.

Same here with the offset bushings in the Burris Rings.
I have a Sightron SII 4.5-14x44 mildot with 80 or 100 MOA elevation.

Nice looking rifle!


I have a .22 and use the J & P spacers with Burris Signature Z rings, and a Leupold VX2 4x12 40MM with the Adjustable Objective and pretty happy with the setup...







Couple of threads...





 

Whatever optic you choose, make sure the parallax can be adjusted fairly close. Many cheaper optics have fixed parallax, and those that are adjustable will only go down to 50 yds. Not ideal when you may want to use a rimfire at 10-25yds.

I respectfully disagree.  There's nothing wrong with parallax adjustment but it should not be your priority.

I have a Leuopold VX2 3-9x33mm EFR and it's a great scope, but I prefer the optics on the VX-2 3-9x40mm and even though it's a centerfire scope with the parallax fixed at 150 yards, it's not a problem.

Focus at 10-25 yards isn't an issue at 3x-4x and parallax error is so minimal that it can be ignored for all practical purposes, unless you've got a really poor fitting stock and/or a poorly mounted scope that results in very inconsistent eye placement.

The only place where an EFR scope matters is if for some reason you need to use maximum magnification with razor sharp focus at 10-25 yards, and there just are not that many instances where you need an apparent target distance of 1.1 to 2.8 yards.

Consequently, I advise placing the emphasis on the best optics you can afford, without spending the budget on things that don't really matter - like parallax adjustment and close focus capability.