Good, inexpensive scope mounts for Cetme?

[moreammoplz]

Looking for a mount that will not break the bank. Looking just for plinking not competition.

Thanks,

[okie shooter]

Looking for a mount that will not break the bank. Looking just for plinking not competition.

Thanks,

Need more info on your rifle though, is it a cast receiver or stamped century model? That makes a difference on which mounts fit the best. Many folks have had good luck with the low swat type mounts but they all seem to require fitting due to the fact that the century stamped steel receiver is not within specifications. There has been more luck on cast receivers, and if you have a FAC/Springfield cast aluminum receiver you need no mount as its built in.

On the old site there were some good pointers to get mounts to work well to include useing the hole in the top of the receiver and a small set screw to keep the mount from moving from recoil.

[cimmaronkid]

I have had good luck with the B Square mount. It tightens from the side and has screws on top to put some pressure on the top of the receiver. If you take the back screw and place it over the hole on top, you will see that the tapered end fits there and secures the scope from moving on the receiver. It is a high type of mount and you might want to get a cheek piece or a comb pad to raise the comb so you can keep a better cheek weld.

[KnobCreek]

The last time I checked, CTD and MidwayUSA had a couple good deals on some inexpensive scope mounts. Try going there and doing a search. I use a Stanag claw mount but the B Square come in high regards from numerous members.

[moreammoplz]

I have a Stamped Century model. I saw one on a Cetme in the for sale section of thefiringline that looked really nice, but wasn't sure how well it stood up to the recoil.

M

[okie shooter]

The b-square is going to be good, but maybe not be inexpensive to your thoughts. That said, you need to do some work on the lower cost(cheaper) mounts to keep it from drifting from recoil. Does any one have that post on useing the center hole in the receiver with a set screw in the mount to keep it from drifting. That would fix you largest problem with the ill fitting mounts by fixing it to the receiver under recoil.

[LostInTexas]

Just my 2 cents, but stay away from the airsoft junk out there! You will be wasting your money. They held up for a mag or two and then were worthless. Spend a little bit and get a b-squared.

[jfowl31]

the "ultimate stamped receiver scope mount" is IMO exactly what it is was titled on the old site... THE ULTIMATE!

The B-square is nice, and the Stanag mount I have on mine is also nice, but quite honestly, I prefer a low mount anyday. Much easier to mess with bullet drop and all that.

The stanag offsets the scope so far, that I dont even move the scope off of the "1" setting to shoot out to 350 yards or so... Most dont have the opportunity to go out and shoot at the various distances to see where their rifle hits, so they just have to go by a chart. I woulda been screwed if I had done that, and run my scope up 20 clicks to shoot at 300 yards with a 100 yard zero.

Id say go with the low pro, unless you want to add a cheekpiece, then get either the B-square or another similar to it.

[leonidas]

I am trying to find a low pro mount for a scope and I like the mounts that tighten upwards instead of inwards. Any sites on where I might be able to find any?? I am not sure if <a href="http://www.combathunting.com/H_K-H_K_Low_Profile_Universal_Scope_Mount_MP5_G3.html">this</a> will work on a CETME since the receiver in the picture looks to be shorter than on my rifle.

[industrialstrength]

The reason the receiver is shorter is because the rail is mounted on a MP5 in the pic. To fit it on a Cetme or G-3 the mount is turned around the other direction

Be careful of what you buy. I just got burned by buying one with aluminium feet. The threads are very fine and I'm worried I'll strip the feet if I torq the bolts down too tight.

If the Leapers mount truely has steel feet I'd go with it.

[tanstaafl4y]

Be careful of what you buy. I just got burned buy buying one with aluminium feet. The threads are very fine and I'm worried I'll strip the feet if I tork the bolts down too tight.


I had a knock off made from pot-metal and stripped the threads. as a work around I JB welded the holes. I still could not get a good solid lock so I beer can shimmed the mount...it still wouldn't hold....so I took the mount off completely.

I had excenent results with a TAPCO Low/Swat mount...however it wasn't low enough for my liking, I couldn't get a good cheek weld without a cheekpeice (that precluded use of the iron sights.)

[leonidas]

Let's hope this <a href="http://www.combathunting.com/H_K-H_K_Low_Profile_Universal_Scope_Mount_MP5_G3.html">mount<a/> works. Not sure how it will work but I hope that it does, sucks if I spend 30 bucks and no luck (=

I did get a cool <a href="http://www.kalinkaoptics.com/detail.aspx?ID=116">scope<a/> from Kalinka. They seemed to look pretty good and well made. I guess you could say it's trial and error time, or i hope trial and success. :icon_mrgreen:

[jfowl31]

The one posted is only $20.. though I suppose after shipping it might be $30

Ive seen those on some rifles posted here, and from what I remember, most seem to like them... I like the look of them for sure... very finished looking.

[halfmoa]

This is the mount I used when I posted it on the other web site (I was str8shuter over there). It has been on the rifle for over 3 years now and more that 2000 rounds have gone down the pipe with zero issues. I will try to dig up the original post from my computer and post it again.
Jim

[W.E.G.]

bump

[danielsand]

I bought the Leapers "dual rail" (see through) for only one reason (I don't need more than one rail!),...I found out that it has TWO "anchor" screws going into the receiver. One I lined up with the existing hole in front of the rear sight, and the other one I just screwed tight against the top of the receiver (forget about the finish, this thing is not coming off!). It holds VERY WELL. No movement, no "walking", nothing. "See through" is a useless feature for me too. While the scope is operational and mounted on the weapon, I can not use the irons (scope would "carve" me pretty good!), and if the scope goes to crap in the field, I'll just ditch the mount too.

The only thing I don't like, is this mount's height. I wish it would be lower. Now I'm thinking about getting the low mount from "Airsplat" (same mount some sites sell for twice the money!), but I don't know if it has the "anchor" screws? Does it?

[aristides]

A good one is
http://www.mfiap.com/smallarms/hk-low-mount.htm
After trying some of the cheaper options, I eventually paid the $130 thinking that for sure it will not move forward. Unbelievably it slid forward too so...
On 8-11 J.C.Spear helped me with the low profile mount problem. His idea solved the forward slide of the mount. So far, after firing 200 rounds it has not moved.See his post or read below:
["While I have not tried it yet, I found this in another thread and archived it for later use...

I'm quoting someone else here...credit to whoever wrote it..

The Ultimate Stamped CETME scope mount solution --seriously

This project starts with the leapers low profile mount. The locking blocks are steel, and the mount itself is hardened T6 aluminum.
You can get if from Cheaper than Dirt for $30 or from Airsplat for $15. Same mount, but some folks just won't buy from an airsoft dealer. The reason I went with this mount is that like the high-dollar B&T mount, the solid sides of the base only permit the locking pieces to be drawn UP to lock them into place. There is no possibility of them splaying outwards and thus loosening as WILL happen with other mounts.

Mine feels perfectly stable, but I decided to drill and tap it for a set screw just to be sure. To give credit where credit is due, this was inspired by Str8shuter's modification. However, as I was preparing to drill the mount, I noticed that the underside has several 3/16 inch slots to engage the HK scope stops. I also know that the hole in the Cetme Receiver is 3/16 of an inch as well. Then it occurred to me, "why not tap the hole, and thread in a set screw from below to engage the slot in the mount?" So I did.

The proper tap for the pre-existing hole is 12-24. You will also need a T-handle as pictured to reach the hole from below. The tap was $2, and the Handle was $5. After striping the weapon, simply start the tap into the hole from below, turn, and it is threaded in about 5 seconds, It's that easy. You then need to set and tighten the mount, with the slot over the threaded hole, and insert a 1/4 inch 12-24 set screw from inside the receiver, and tighten. This length set screw will mount perfectly flush yet allow sufficient torque to put additional pressure on the lower side of the mount, and hold the screw very tight. I could not find an allen-headed screw, so I am using a slotted one, but will change when I locate a stronger allen head. I will then apply locktight as well.
That is, assuming you have a stamped receiver!
Hope this helps!"]

It was an easy fix. The only changes I made from his suggestion was to use the more expensive mount because I purchased it already. And I used a screw 1 inch long. It was then notched and left exposed to act a fixed rear sight if needed. The original century cetme rear sight was removed. For my eyes their rear paddle was worthless.
Like J.C. I hope this helps.

[the_shootist]

Some very good information here. I've been thinking about a scope mount as I have a scope identical to halfmoa's but no mount as yet.

Is the scope on a Cetme effective enough to justify the added size and bulk it gives the weapon? I'd be interested in some feedback from you guys on this.

[wwIIBuff]

I know TAPCO made a copy of the STANAG mount.

[danielsand]

Some very good information here. I've been thinking about a scope mount as I have a scope identical to halfmoa's but no mount as yet.

Is the scope on a Cetme effective enough to justify the added size and bulk it gives the weapon? I'd be interested in some feedback from you guys on this.

This seems to be a touchy subject, around here. I dared to speak against Stanag mount on this board, and got my a$$ kicked! :nonono:

I (ME, PERSONALLY!!) PREFER (and in no way mean to force this opinion on anybody else!!) the low mount shown in the pic on the tan painted CETME. The mount I originally purchased (see through, dual rail), was a great mount, but sitting a tad too high for my liking, although it was MUCH lower than Stanag. After pondering a bit about it, I ordered the low mount from Airsplat, and I couldn't be happier. Sits low (I DETEST cheek pieces on my rifles, and of course this is MY opinion, and I don't care if you have it on your rifle, this is NOT a personal attack on anybody sporting cheek piece on his rifle!), "dirt cheap", no movement under recoil, and the only thing I don't like, is the ease of mounting and removing (I guess you can't have it all!). Once mounted, it will never come off. Scope can be removed with relative ease, and the irons used with the mount left on the receiver.

Is it worth scoping? For ME the answer is "yes". I shoot out to 4-5 hundred meters, I don't hunt, I don't fight zombies, and I don't need a 1000 dollar glass, with super duper ("original"!) Stanag mount, and what not. But with this mount and either a simple variable Simmons, or Leapers, I see much better to produce a fist sized groups to these distances. Without the scope, I can BARELLY see the target, much less produce a consistent hold.

So anyway,....this works for me. I have a Stanag mount and Hensoldt scope that I purchased but didn't like. I kept it, in case I ever change my mind. Why I don't like it?
Too high for my taste, limited eye relief (no possibility to slide the scope back and forth on the mount), you don't have much room to move the set up back and forth on the receiver for better eye relief. It might work good on HK, but on CETME, it moves under recoil.

Nuff of this! Too long of a post already.

[the_shootist]

Great feedback Daniel....just the kind of stuff I'm looking for.Before I pull the trigger (pun intended) is this the low profile mount I've been seeing as the best option from Airsplat?

http://www.airsplat.com/Itemdesc.asp?ic=AC-MNT-P668&eq=&Tp=




This seems to be a touchy subject, around here. I dared to speak against Stanag mount on this board, and got my a$$ kicked! :nonono:

I (ME, PERSONALLY!!) PREFER (and in no way mean to force this opinion on anybody else!!) the low mount shown in the pic on the tan painted CETME. The mount I originally purchased (see through, dual rail), was a great mount, but sitting a tad too high for my liking, although it was MUCH lower than Stanag. After pondering a bit about it, I ordered the low mount from Airsplat, and I couldn't be happier. Sits low (I DETEST cheek pieces on my rifles, and of course this is MY opinion, and I don't care if you have it on your rifle, this is NOT a personal attack on anybody sporting cheek piece on his rifle!), "dirt cheap", no movement under recoil, and the only thing I don't like, is the ease of mounting and removing (I guess you can't have it all!). Once mounted, it will never come off. Scope can be removed with relative ease, and the irons used with the mount left on the receiver.

Is it worth scoping? For ME the answer is "yes". I shoot out to 4-5 hundred meters, I don't hunt, I don't fight zombies, and I don't need a 1000 dollar glass, with super duper ("original"!) Stanag mount, and what not. But with this mount and either a simple variable Simmons, or Leapers, I see much better to produce a fist sized groups to these distances. Without the scope, I can BARELLY see the target, much less produce a consistent hold.

So anyway,....this works for me. I have a Stanag mount and Hensoldt scope that I purchased but didn't like. I kept it, in case I ever change my mind. Why I don't like it?
Too high for my taste, limited eye relief (no possibility to slide the scope back and forth on the mount), you don't have much room to move the set up back and forth on the receiver for better eye relief. It might work good on HK, but on CETME, it moves under recoil.

Nuff of this! Too long of a post already.

[snakomatix]

I own one of those types that I bought from someone else. It works great with my PTR-91. It has a milled spot underneath that the saddle on top of the receiver fits into. Doesn't move at all.

However, if you get one of those, be aware... You will not be able to put a port buffer on your rifle with it on.


Great feedback Daniel....just the kind of stuff I'm looking for.Before I pull the trigger (pun intended) is this the low profile mount I've been seeing as the best option from Airsplat?

http://www.airsplat.com/Itemdesc.asp?ic=AC-MNT-P668&eq=&Tp=

[danielsand]

I own one of those types that I bought from someone else. It works great with my PTR-91. It has a milled spot underneath that the saddle on top of the receiver fits into. Doesn't move at all.

However, if you get one of those, be aware... You will not be able to put a port buffer on your rifle with it on.

Yup, that's the mount we've been talking about. You can mount it easily without the port buffer on the rifle. Once the mount is on the receiver, you can't put the port buffer back! WTF!!?

I was thinking and thinking, getting more and more upset. I like the mount, and I HAVE TO have a port buffer (no, I don't reload, but I like to pick up my brass behind me), if I ever want to see my brass again! So what to do?

The port buffer has too much metal on itself! The only "important" part of the buffer is the gizmo that contains the rubber deflector, the rest is just a dead weight. After that conclusion, the solution was easy,....I hacked quite a bit of sheet metal from the buffer, worked the edges with a nice file, baked everything in the oven (wifey was livid!), and made the buffer work with the mount. Pretty self explanatory, and simple once you have a mount and the buffer in hand to look at them.

[jfowl31]

I own one of those types that I bought from someone else. It works great with my PTR-91. It has a milled spot underneath that the saddle on top of the receiver fits into. Doesn't move at all.

However, if you get one of those, be aware... You will not be able to put a port buffer on your rifle with it on.

Only cast receivered Cetmes have this "saddle" you are speaking of (in the Cetme world I mean). All PTR and HK rifles have a saddle as well, but stamped Cetmes don't, hence the need for all the drilling and tapping needed to keep a scope mount secure on a stamped Cetme.

About that "Swat" mount you had Danielsand (the one with 2 rails) I had one similar called the B-square mount with only the scope rail. Mine sat just as high as the Hendsoldt mount once I got rings on there and it was damn ugly sitting up on top what with that huge chunk of aluminum.

The low profile mount is the best way to CHEAPLY get a mount on a Cetme, and it makes it feel more like an AR or the likes with the fairly low mounted scope. Its still WAY above the bore because the cocking tube is there and all, so IMO, you don't gain much advantage ballistically, its all just a comfort thing.

I went with a Hendsoldt clamp-on mount with a Fero Z24 scope on top from dans ammo for $375 shipped NIB back in the day for my Cast Cetme. It has performed incredibly well and had zero problems. It WILL require that you buy a cheekpiece (I went with Cherokee) that is removeable so you can pop everything off and shoot irons... don't try to shoot irons with the scope on even though you can see through, or you WILL get popped in the forehead by the scope, I got the scar to prove it.

Its all about what you want as far as power goes, and its dictated by what receiver you have. If you've got a stamped receiver (rear sight welded on) then the clamp on mounts are out of the question, they will move under recoil. In this case, the low-pro mount is a great alternative.

btw, Danielsand, once again, no one crucified you for not liking the Hendsoldt mount, you got crucified because you stated the $15 airsoft mount was a better scope mount......... It may fit your needs better, and be more comfy to you, but.... doesn't really matter. I'm happy you have a mount that suits you. Hopefully the OP and anyone else with the same question will consider all options and buy what THEY want.

[rifleman]

i bought mine from WBC and i dont know where he got it. it is low profile. which is good becuse of the sliding stock. and now it looks bad a$$. btw mine is a cast. jfowl, what so you mean welded on rear sight?

[jfowl31]

Cast receivers have the rear sight ears cast right in with the receiver casting.

Stamped steel receivers have the receiver stamped, then the rear sight ears have to be welded onto the top of the receiver. Century did them a bit sloppy typically, and they look like they are just tack welded on sometimes. A stamped Century gun will always have a weld at each corner of the rear sight and it won't have the needed "saddle" to keep a scope mount from moving fore and aft when mounted. Cast Cetmes have this saddle.

[rifleman]

you talking about those nub things as a saddle

[jfowl31]

you talking about those nub things as a saddle

No, look in the top picture of Okie's post here http://www.militaryfirearm.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=6427&highlight=stamped+cast+difference

Just in front of that rear sight is a piece that literally looks like a saddle. Its just a half cm or so in front of the rear sight.

If your gun doesn't have this saddle, its not a Century Cast receiver. On PTR's and HK's, the saddle is machined into the rear sight block.

The nub things on the sides (4 of them total) are scope mounting lugs. The stamped guns have these lugs, but without the saddle, the scope mount still moves under recoil.

also, the second pic in Okie's post is the FAC cast ALUMINUM receivers.... not anything we are talking about here.

[rifleman]

ok looks like my ol cetme is a stamped

[aristides]

Dear Shootist,
re."s the scope on a Cetme effective enough to justify the added size and bulk it gives the weapon? I'd be interested in some feedback from you guys on this."
Most Cetme rear sights on Century Imports have a paddle wheel tacked welded too far rearward for a good sight picture. The M1 Garand has perhaps the best fixed sight for combat shooting.While holding the M1 or M1A or Mauser compare its distance from your eye to the Cetme's distance . The Cetme rear paddle lies too close to the shooters eye. It lacks the precision of the M1s or the Mausers.
So to gain the distance afforded by the .308NATO, a scope or reflex sight seemed the answer. A scope that lies high over the receiver requires that most shooters install a cheek pad or cushion. These mounts also require that the shooter's forehead lie several inches too high, kinda like a soon to be shot turkey that's looking for movement. The low profile mount makes for a light and streamlined package. It also gives the shooter a comfortable less exposed prone position. As to weight? ' mount is nil. Scopes vary upon your selection. Get a cheap $10 low profile mount and try out its feel with your rifle. Then decide. Does this help?

[jfowl31]

Dear Shootist,
re."s the scope on a Cetme effective enough to justify the added size and bulk it gives the weapon? I'd be interested in some feedback from you guys on this."
Most Cetme rear sights on Century Imports have a paddle wheel tacked welded too far rearward for a good sight picture. The M1 Garand has perhaps the best fixed sight for combat shooting.While holding the M1 or M1A or Mauser compare its distance from your eye to the Cetme's distance . The Cetme rear paddle lies too close to the shooters eye. It lacks the precision of the M1s or the Mausers.
So to gain the distance afforded by the .308NATO, a scope or reflex sight seemed the answer. A scope that lies high over the receiver requires that most shooters install a cheek pad or cushion. These mounts also require that the shooter's forehead lie several inches too high, kinda like a soon to be shot turkey that's looking for movement. The low profile mount makes for a light and streamlined package. It also gives the shooter a comfortable less exposed prone position. As to weight? ' mount is nil. Scopes vary upon your selection. Get a cheap $10 low profile mount and try out its feel with your rifle. Then decide. Does this help?

I'd agree with everything except the placement of the rear sight. Every Cetme rifle I've seen has the sight tacked in the right spot, and the spot AND sight picture are exactly the same as a G3 or HK91 even though the sights look different. The holes have the same diameter and are at the same spot. The rear sight has to be at this distance to be able to get the sight picture they are designed for. They are designed to be a hybrid of a peep sight (like M1a or garand) and a ghost ring sight. You should see a faint ring of light around the front sight, and in order to get this picture, the sight has to be that far rearward.

I agree with you that the M1garand picture is better, but that's strictly OUR opinion as there are plenty of guys who would argue with you for hours that the Cetme/G3 sights are the best designed sights on a battle rifle.

As far as the scope mounts being too high, perhaps its a size of the shooter issue as well. I'm a big guy... 6'4" and 230ish lbs, and there's no craning of the neck or anything for me. Its the most comfortable gun I have to shoulder and look through the scope BECAUSE of the height of the scope. My smaller friends have more isses with it for just the reasons you described, but a broad shouldered guy should have no issues with it whatsoever and it may, for you (like me) become the most comfy gun you have to shoot with the high setup. The good thing about the high stuff is that they are engineered to be that height, so the index marks on the scope work quite well for shooting the various distances.

[the_shootist]

....and with averagejoe's tutorial post I'll be tapping the existing hole in the receiver and making the mount totally secure with a set screw. I have a BSA 12X50 scope which I plan on using that should look kick ass (pictures will be forthcoming)

I have a small problem with the mount. I stripped and broke one of the screws installing the mount (my error but the pin is ok) and am now searching for an additional screw to complete the installation (small problem on the grand scheme of things). Once I get a new screw (and receive the scope O-rings ordered off eBay) I'll be off to the races and will post pics.

[the_shootist]

Dear Shootist,
re."s the scope on a Cetme effective enough to justify the added size and bulk it gives the weapon? I'd be interested in some feedback from you guys on this."
Most Cetme rear sights on Century Imports have a paddle wheel tacked welded too far rearward for a good sight picture. The M1 Garand has perhaps the best fixed sight for combat shooting.While holding the M1 or M1A or Mauser compare its distance from your eye to the Cetme's distance . The Cetme rear paddle lies too close to the shooters eye. It lacks the precision of the M1s or the Mausers.
So to gain the distance afforded by the .308NATO, a scope or reflex sight seemed the answer. A scope that lies high over the receiver requires that most shooters install a cheek pad or cushion. These mounts also require that the shooter's forehead lie several inches too high, kinda like a soon to be shot turkey that's looking for movement. The low profile mount makes for a light and streamlined package. It also gives the shooter a comfortable less exposed prone position. As to weight? ' mount is nil. Scopes vary upon your selection. Get a cheap $10 low profile mount and try out its feel with your rifle. Then decide. Does this help?

It sure does. This is why I love this site! Lots of great people helping out each other. Thank you!!!

[jakeb2008]

Can anyone tell me about this mount by NcStar. You can still use the port buffer with it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Low-Profile-Tactical-Rail-Scope-Mount-for-Hk-H-k-Rifles_W0QQitemZ370104352034QQcmdZViewItem?hash=it em370104352034&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C39%3A1%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C 240%3A1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

[HankC]

Can anyone tell me about this mount by NcStar. You can still use the port buffer with it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Low-Profile-Tactical-Rail-Scope-Mount-for-Hk-H-k-Rifles_W0QQitemZ370104352034QQcmdZViewItem?hash=it em370104352034&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C39%3A1%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C 240%3A1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

Did not work on my Hess stamp receiver CETME.

[jakeb2008]

I took the advice of the thread and bought the Leapers mount. Its a good mount. I think the bolts are a bit to long though. I went to a local hardware store and got some shorter ones.

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa51/djstimuli/DSCN2217.jpg