But I don't want to use a scope anymore...

Ok old fart :p

An aimpoint is better than irons 99 times out of 100, period. Single focal plane aiming is obviously easier. All things being equal easier means more hits, and better hits. Less lost game. There's a reason that the military can't get enough Elcans, ACOGs, Aimpoints, etc. They're just flat out better than irons, especially for CQB which actually has a lot in common with deep woods whitetail hunting in terms of shot presentation.

Hey 40 is the new 30. :p :D

I have to agree with you on Aimpoints and I would choose them over Irons.
To summarize my preferences are...

1) Aimpoints and other Red dots (non magnified).
2) Irons with Aperture sites.



Scopes and irons are aiming devices, they have nothing to do wiht the ability to hunt.

A scope is a superior aiming device 99% of the time.

Methinks if you can't hit your target then you are just hiking with a rifle. :D
Besides which I'm talking about hunting in the brush over here with targets well inside 100 meters, not shooting from one mountain top to another up North. :D
 
Last edited:
I would agree that magnified glass inside of 100 yards is pretty redundant for hunting purposes. That new Trijicon 1-4 is tempting although... poor man's short dot with no batteries.
 
I would agree that magnified glass inside of 100 yards is pretty redundant for hunting purposes. That new Trijicon 1-4 is tempting although... poor man's short dot with no batteries.


When you say poor mans short dot, how cheap are we talking?
And who carries them in Canada?

I certainly like the features on this Dot sight and especially the lack of the need for batteries. :)
 
Well, I think retail will settle down to 600 USD once they're on the market in volume. They're only trickling out into the USA so far.

Maybe not poor man's short dot, more like middle class man's short dot?
 
Well I say if your dissatisfied with new rifle manufactures, show them by not purchasing there rifles, buy good used rifles, and make sure you make your voice heard. Maybe they'll clue in.

IMO the best Irons there are:

Brno ZKK 602 with factory peep sights, shown here in the down position:

PeepSightBrno012.jpg


And then in the up position:

PeepSightBrno015.jpg


PeepSightBrno011.jpg


Here's the push button to pop it up (thats just grease on there, I know it looks like rust, but its not)

DSCN1354-1.jpg



Note that when down, they don't interfere with scope mounting, as there flush with the top, and even when down you have the 3 sight blades, 100, 200, and 300:

PeepSightBrno009.jpg


I find the peep every bit as accurate as my Leupold VXII 1.5x5x20 at 100, haven't shot it at paper any further yet.

-Trev
 
Last edited:
Iron sights make a good rifle look better... complete, even.

I can see not putting them on a target rifle for shooting tiny groups at 1000 yards, but nothing says classy like iron on a blued steel with walnut gun. Even if you never use them ;)
 
Iron sights make a good rifle look better... complete, even.

I can see not putting them on a target rifle for shooting tiny groups at 1000 yards, but nothing says classy like iron on a blued steel with walnut gun. Even if you never use them ;)


You mean like at Bisley with Milsurp Enfields and their Iron sights shooting 1200 yards? :p :D



Them sights on the Brno have got to be the best set imaginable, what more could you ask for...perfect.

X2 Damn straight, that is one nice looking Brno ZKK 602 Mr. tkv000.
IMHO this is the sort of design style and features sorely lacking in most of today's hunting firearms.
What Caliber is that beauty in? :)
 
Last edited:
My 1890 Win has marbles wide buckhorn or antlers type rear sights ,they are super cool(on a .22WRF) I wish I had some for my mod 94 30/30 .

It's not like I'm going to be shooting that far . But when you buy a classic rifle the first thing they deduct is that you had it drilled for scopes.

Now they come that way without sights!

You can't have it both ways!

Bob
 
Calum I agree with you 100& the rifle should come out of the box ready to hit paper,and it should come with front and rear sights. And if by agreement with buyer as to purchase it without both sights it should be discounted by several hundreds to purchase sight and mounts!

We need to write letters to major manufactores to tell them this,but bottom line they just don't care!

I'm like you I would like to have it my way!

Bob
 
The most fun I've had shooting recently has been with a NECG ghost ring and a post front sight on my ZG-47 .30/06. Not too long ago, shooting from prone, I managed two 5 shot MOA groups on a 300 yard target before I called it a day. The interesting thing was that the ammo was nothing special, full length sized mixed brass, 180 gr Remington bulk bullets crimped in place at the cannelure, and loaded with 3031 which I wanted to use up. Go figure. Even when the light is right, shooting with irons is far more demanding than shooting with a scope, and I'll tell ya, you feel pretty impressed with yourself when you pull off a MOA group.
 
I agree Boomer -- I really feel that when you have a scope and you work up a load for a hunting rifle, you spend too much time trying for that last 1/2 inch of accuracy - when you have the good irons (I love aperature sights as they are better for older eyes now) you point and fire and I am constanly amazed how the bullet ends up where you want it to go.....

I think it is because you dont worry about putting the bullet behind the second rib .... or whatever.. you aim at the center mass and shoot - with good results.

Scopes can make you too fussy before you squeeze and you end up giving yourself the "yips" like in golf and you end up taking too long to fire and likely miss the shot opportunity.
 
If I want iron sights on a rifle, I'll pick out the style I want and install them. Most irons from the factory are just junk.

The iron sights on the .375 Ruger Alaskan are very good, the sights on the Mdl 94 trapper I just bought kinda suck, and are going to be replaced with some good ones.:)

I think this is it right here. Why pay for crappy iron sights ? I would rather keep them off completely as I usually scope my rifles and IF I do need irons, I will invest the money in a quality set (which I would have to do anyways if the factory irons sucked).

If we wanted good iron sights on the our rifles, the price would be jacked up accordingly, and if you didn't like the style of the sights (ghost ring, etc), you might STILL have to change them out.
 
I put a Williams FP reciever peep sight and a Firesight front sight on my Win 94 BB 375 Win and it is a huge improvement over the crappy factory sights, I would have been better off without the factory sights to start with as I just took them off and had to fill the rear sight dovetail slot with a Marble's slot blank.
 
Well the lack of quality of iron sights on rifles these days is yet another issue I have...

Perhaps this crutch on scopes has lowered the once competitive abilities of the Rifle makers, so they no longer feel the need to put good sights on them.

Just make half a rifle and the consumer will replace all the crap parts anyway. :rolleyes:
 
...IMO the best Irons there are:

Brno ZKK 602 with factory peep sights, shown here in the down position...

Those are classics! Talley makes a similar pop-up sight built into a rear scope base. Then there are the Hellqvist and Norma "jagtdiopter" aperture sights that used to be available on Husqvarna rifles.

Hellqvist rear sight.jpg


1640_jaktdiopter1.gif


And check out Gottfried Prechtl's website (golmatic.de) He makes a
rather nice aperture:

Golmatic aperture sight.jpg


He also makes a full range of iron sights - even an "elevated" front sight for Enfields to bring your SMLE POI down.

:) Stuart
 
Those are classics! Talley makes a similar pop-up sight built into a rear scope base. Then there are the Hellqvist and Norma "jagtdiopter" aperture sights that used to be available on Husqvarna rifles.

Hellqvist rear sight.jpg


I'd love to have that on both of my Swedish Mausers. :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom