Annual "Who's using irons" thread...

Jeff/1911

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
962   0   0
Location
Edmonton
Hi Guys,

I thought I'd be the first to post this...I've seen similar threads here over the years. :)

I will be hunting with a BLR in .308 w/ factory iron sights this year...who else is going to be using irons?

I actually had this rifle set up with a Leupold Compact 3-9X VXII, and was convinced that I was all ready to go. However, after some trouble sighting the rifle in, and having removed the scope to "check things out"...I realized just how nice handling this particular rifle is with iron sights as opposed to the scope. So, I'm just going to use it like this. :)

Jeff/1911.
 
Last edited:
I have sold/traded off ALL but one of my hunting firearms for tactical ones! Only thing I have left is a 6.5x55 swede thats been sporterized and rockin your average
3x9-40 bushnell

002-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
I may own a couple scopes... but my favoured arms these days wear peep sights, a pre '64 30-30, marlin 1894 .44, and a husky lightweight .308. And they will be looking for sheep, caribou and moose in the next two months!
 
Most likely will be. Last year they worked just fine so this year I will probably use the 45/70 w/Skinner Sights again. However I just loaded up some 53grTSX's for the .223 so we will see how they shoot, and they might get a go.
 
I own rifles that wear scopes, others that are fitted with ghost rings and posts, and some have both irons and scopes. My quandary at the moment is to decide how to proceed with my Winchester M-70 Safari .458. The factory sights don't do if for me in that the rear sight has a very narrow deep V, which tends to block the target, the bead front sights provides no index of elevation, or sharp contrast with natural objects which tend not to have sharp edges, and the front sight ramp appears to be a bit fragile particularly with the small mounting screws used to hold it to the barrel.

The rifle is primarily going to be used as a bear gun which suggests that a ghost ring and post is an optimal sighting arrangement, but this choice limits my ability of shooting well, to about 200 yards, under all circumstances. While I've on occasion shot MOA groups at 300 yards with irons, it was under bright sunny conditions, with little wind, on a target that sharply contrasting both the sight and the background, it was not with a .458, and the occasions stand out clearly in my memory. I've shot many 1-2 MOA groups under field conditions at and beyond 300 yards with scoped hunting rifles of considerable power, and none of those occasion stands out in my memory as exceptional. If I intend to get 300 yards out of this thing, I think I have to scope it. My choice of glass at the moment is directed toward the 1-4X25 Nightforce. This scope has 100' field of view at 100, so should be a good scope should the occasion arise for a close range shot in the willows, the etched reticle should be resilient to recoil abuse, and the NP-1 reticle might be useful for providing sufficient hold over for longish shots, although I would have to work with it a while to determine that.

So why the quandary? It should be a simple matter to mount the scope in QD rings, carry a back-up ghost ring rear sight, and install a front barrel band sight with a robust front post. Well, I want the scope mounted so the the scope's ocular is in line with, and no farther rearward than the rear of the cocking piece. I can't think of any QD extension rings, and of tyhere were, would they provide sufficient length to accommodate the long eye piece of the Nightforce scope? A two piece pic rail with Weaver style rings might provide an answer, but I'll have to give the matter a bit more thought.
 
Pushing/tracking I carry an old '94 with flat irons. I'm also known to be walking around with it from 10am-2pm while everyones riding around road hunting.
 
Back
Top Bottom