Bring back open sights

brokencyde

brokencyde

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
ontario
:mad: How come most of my favorite rifles either have no open sights, or a f*@&%in raised comb?!?! For example, the browning bar, i would love to have one, buuut no open sights and probably and arm and a leg to get them put on.

Another example, the remington 7600, it had the awesome sights i love, but a raised comb meant for a scope...I hate scopes where i hunt :mad:

I found a nice left handed bolt i would like for moose hunting in 300RUM, but guess what?! No open sights!

Sorry for the rant but who else is with me?!
 
The absence of sights on factory rifles is a mixed blessing. While you can't take the rifle out of the box and go shooting, a bare canvass provides the opportunity to install the sights that you want on your rifle, rather than someone else's idea of what you need.

I agree, that todays rifles are built with too high a comb, and there should at least be some low comb options. Even the comb on my McMillan stocked Brno, which is supposed to mimic the lines of an English express stock, has a comb high enough to make shooting with irons unpleasant due to the effect of heavy recoil when my cheek is mashed down on the stock.
 
The sights i want would definatly be remington sight, i think there made by marble? I'm not sure but there my favorite sights. If remington made a left hand 7600, i would sell my property to buy it and put my straight combed la fluer de lise stock on it...I don't mind the right hand action...I just feel like a outlaw and a weirdo using the wrong hand action and would like something custom but i could never afford it :(
 
Haha, i used a lever savage 99 300sa faithfully from the time i was 12 till i was 17...Levers not really my gun, neither is semi or bolt. I like my pump and wouldn't trade it for the world...
 
brokencyde said:
I'm guessing QD rings are see through?
Click to expand...

No they are low to medium height. To use the irons, they are Quick Detachable with mounted levers, no tools required.

IMG_5483.jpg
 
I'm with you. I removed the scope on my 444 because I just prefer the way it carries without. The little 2.5X Compact sure added to my range but give me a peep sight.

Bought a Lyman left hand .54 flintlock last year and added a receiver sight. Looks a bit goofy with the modern sight but it sure shrank my groups.

There has to be thousands of removed sights out there. Maybe a post on the exchange would net you some choices.

Have you seen the new Remington pump with the AR style clip yet?
 
I'm another iron sight fan, and I guess it's lucky for me that I prefer the 50+ years old rifles that have them, and are correctly stocked for them.

To me, there's no satisfaction like an FN Sporter with a Lyman 48 or a three leaf safari sight, or a SAKO with an original aperture rear sight. Even the early Belgian (FN) Brownings had pleasing stocks and good iron sights, as did many of the earlier Winchesters and (ugh! gag! spit!) Remingtons. I do confess to using an early Remington Model 7 as a truck gun, (but only) because it's so short & light, and has workable iron sights. From the factory it wouldn't hit a buffalo in the ass at three paces and it took me 5 years to get it to shoot, but that's another story.

My advice? Shop 'older'. Old rifles are like old violins. The stocks were cut better and they had good iron sights. As far as I'm concerned, they stopped making rifles in about 1960. Everything since is...God knows what. 'Wannabe' rifles, maybe. Plastic rifles for a plastic world. No man should have a rifle younger than he is. It just ain't right.

Scopes are for skateboarders...did I forget to mention that?:p

I'm going to go have my coffee now.:D:D
 
i think that the reason guns like you mention in 300RUM, 30-06, 270 eor whatever are sightless, is because they are by design long range cartridges, which unless you have a 30"+ barrel and receiver or tang sight for a very long sighting radius, you will need to use a scope to max their potential out to the ranges they were intended to be used at. If you want a short range bush gun there are lots out there that have open sights but they are typically chambered in short to moderate range cartridges that do not require the use of a scope to be accurate within their intended effective range. 45/70, .450, .444, 35 rem, 30-30... these are rifles that absolutely must come with open sights.
Now if marlin stopped equiping their guns with sights... there would be a real issue. But really, why in the hell would anybody want a .300RUM in a short range gun?
 
Last edited:
Well, I for one, happen to like the clean look of a no iron-sights gun. I can no longer use the open sights beyond 50yds, even then it's iffy. Just can't focus, even with my glasses. I'll take the scope. If I have to take an iron sight, then I'll take a peep or ghost ring. Open sights will not work.
I guess that my beef is that guns with open sights are not suitable for scope mounting since they don't have a high enough comb and then I am constantly trying to build them up. Easier to buy it the way you want it.
To the OP, I would suggest that scoped, or scope ready, rifles are the big sellers and it is the economy that drives the industry. If people buy more rifles with scopes and no open sights, then, I guess you had better stick to the older stuff as you said.
 
I won't buy a rifle without Iron sights!
It's all about saving money for the companies, but
they are losing buisiness with some folks.
At least these companies should offer them on special order
if someone wants their gun this way....
All my rifles are lever action so far....:cheers:
 
I like every bodies opinions for sure! When i get the funds, I'm gettin remington to make me a custom straight comb 7600 in the beautiful La Fluer De Lise wood design in black grade A walnut *drools* haha in left hand!...But that's gonna take some time.
 
Ardent said:
I shoot iron sights more than glass, and prefer not to buy rifles without sights. I have the glass too, but prefer the irons heavily for 90% of hunting. No issue shooting out to 200 yards with iron sights, so I don't feel the need for more complexity, weight, and things to break.
Click to expand...

True say! And comming from a Alberta man...Kudos my good sir, kudos!
 
It's unfortunate but I bet at least 95% of new rifles sold today in more powerful chamberings(.30/06,.270,.308 etc.) are scoped from the get go. I like irons too but I've also used rifles stocked for irons with scopes and your neck is stretched like an ostrich to see thru the scope. I think Rems sights are made by Williams and an option open to you is watch the EE and pick up a 760 from the 1950's, they are stocked for irons and yet still usable with a low mounted scope.
Most times a scope is superior but how many times have you hunted in heavy rain or snow and a scope is next to useless.
 
I can use aperture sights, but I have onle 1 rifle with them [M94 Winny in 38-55] All the rest of my rifles wear scopes by preference, and I really don't give a rat's a** whether any new rifle I buy has sights or not. I will promptly remove them if they are present. I guess it's largely what you get used to. I am now in my mid-sixties, and have used scopes since I was 13. I cannot remember any situation where I was handicapped by optics. However, to each his own!! Eagleye.
 
Ardent said:
No issue shooting out to 200 yards with iron sights,
Click to expand...

+1. I shot my deer this year with my Garand using national match sights. I certainly didn't feel handicapped by the iron sights as long as the light was good. That rifle shoots sub-4" (sub-3" on a good day) groups all day at 200yds off a rest using the iron sights, so I certainly couldn't blame the sights if I missed one.

Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom