Anyone have a DNZ mount on their 1895?

[jpuke]

I'm getting a Marlin 1895 later this week and I'm wondering if anyone has got a DNZ mount on their rifle?  The lowest height they come in is medium and I'd like to know if that's low enough.  I've always gone with the lowest mounts I could get.  The scope that will be mounted is a Leupold 2.5x Ultralight.  I'm hoping that their "medium" mount is about the same as using low rings on a weaver style base.  Thanks.

[Old Grizz]

I think this maybe a trial and error kinda thing. I think the medium will work ok . I have never seen a DNZ mount on a levergun before but I'm with you, I like to get that scope as close to the gun  as possible, so maybe the DNZ may not be the way to go. I guess it depends how low the medium assembly is.  Let us know how the mount works once you get it installed.

[helotaxi]

I have the DNZ on a 336 in .308 ME mounting a Vortex Viper 2-7x32.  It is low enough that the rear sight had to be folded down to clear the objective bell on the scope.  The hammer extension is a must as well and the hammer just barely clears the ocular bell.  That said it still sits a little high for my liking.  A small cheek rest (1/4-1/2" would be plenty) is in the future.

The one real problem that I had was it almost seems that I need a 20MOA base.  I was right at the end of adjustability to get it zeroed at 100yds.  I unmounted it and remounted it.  I need to get it to the range to see if that helped.

[helotaxi]

It's official.  The DNZ mount will not work for my rifle.  Switching to a Weaver/Picatinny rail and Burris Signature rings.  With the scope controls centered, I'm not even on the paper (BIG paper) at 25yds.

[jpuke]

Thanks.  I've decided to go with the XS Lever Rail with Leupold QR Low rings.  I've had good experience with those in the past.