Hood or no hood on a banded front sight?

Hood or no hood?

  • hood

    Votes: 35 63.6%

  • no hood

    Votes: 20 36.4%
  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .
D

double gun

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
351   0   1
Location
Alberta
I am planning on machining a stainless banded front sight, but can't figure out whether or not to add a hood. The rifle will be scoped 99% of the time, but "safari style" rifles need sights in my opinion. If I add a hood, it will have a spring loaded keeper to keep it from moving like the necg version - so if I go hood, I would rather add it before it is installed on the rifle.

So I ask, hood or no hood?
 
My vote is No,
depending on the scope magnification and mounting height it's just more obstruction to show up in your sight picture.
 
No for me too, same reason.
My 404 Jeffery has a banded front sight and with its 1.5X5 Leupold cranked down a sight hood would become an obstruction.
 
No. I can't think of any circumstances where a hood is an advantage on a sporting rifle but I can think of several places where it might be a disadvantage.
 
Last edited:
Disagree with the "gaggle"... Do the hood... It can be removed if required, in the meantime it gives the muzzle end a "balanced" look, protects the front blade and is handy in bright sunlight... If lighting is low, just slip it off. JMO.
 
the rifles of mine that had hoods , the hoods have somehow worked their way loose disappeared .

before they grew legs I found them to be a pain in the butt . something else that would get caught on things while your in a hurry .
 
If it were open sights only, I would say no. They do offer some protection to the front bead, but the hoods come off when the scope comes off. You might as well get a couple of spares while you're building... I've lost more than one.
 
I don't use a hood on mine. Never had a problem and I'm not going to install a hood and remove it throughout the day as the lighting dictates.

011-1.jpg
 
The usefulness of a sight hood depends on the type of country you'll negotiate. If you do much traveling on foot in difficult rocky terrain, sooner or later the front sight will get scuffed, no matter how careful you are. If a scope is the primary sighting instrument, the irons will probably be brought into service only if it suffers some misadventure, and is no longer serviceable. It would be inconvenient, or worse, if the front sight was damaged to the extent that it too was unserviceable. Murphy can be a mother when things begin to go wrong and snowball out of control from there. You'll never notice the weight of that sight hood, and provided you remember to remove it when you remove the scope, all will be fine. NECG's front sight with the fold away hood is an interesting solution to the problem.


 
I completely agree with Boomer. His post shows practical wisdom and experience. I'll only add a side note, on those rifles that have no provision for a hood, I prefer a "patridge" style flat topped, angled gold insert blade sight rather than a bead, because it is more rugged than a bead - and also because it allows more precise aiming ( for my aging eyes) than a bead.
 
Longwalker said:
I completely agree with Boomer. His post shows practical wisdom and experience. I'll only add a side note, on those rifles that have no provision for a hood, I prefer a "patridge" style flat topped, angled gold insert blade sight rather than a bead, because it is more rugged than a bead - and also because it allows more precise aiming ( for my aging eyes) than a bead.
Click to expand...

I agree, a Partridge style blade sight stands up better with the absence of a hood.
 
For those who don't like the look of a sight hood, or are concerned about the loss of light to the front sight but believe they need some level of protection for it, could opt for a winged front sight. Some folks seem to prefer the looks of a winged sight to a hooded one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom