How many of you prefer rifles with back up irons as well as optics?

Dogleg said:
What has happened over the years is a disturbing amount of broken, loosened and lost sights that were supposed to be the rugged back-ups for scopes that never failed.
Click to expand...
agreed, way higher failure rate than I have had with any glass in my decades of hunting.

I pretty much look for and order without sights whenever possible

hoytcanon said:
No offense taken, but your post is nonsense... without a scope I could never, in good conscience, squeeze the trigger on any animal.

Go ahead and make your own artbitrary rules to govern your life, but they don't apply to the majority of hunters...
Click to expand...
well said
 
most of my guns have iron sights, im not a huge scope fan to be honest. most of my shots are no further then 100 yards max..i can gitrdone with irons at that range.
 
There are places in Ontario where a scope is an impediment to ‘hunting’ (as opposed to ‘shooting’). Scopes can add unnecessary weight and adversely effect the balance and ‘liveliness’ of the rifle as well the ability to follow moving game in heavy bush. I am sure this is one of the reasons (if not the major reason) for the Winchester 94’s continued popularity in some areas.... particularly for eastern whitetail. That is why I like iron sights and QD bases/rings for any optics.

As for iron sights coming loose or falling off. Other than losing the occasional front sight hood to a branch in heavy bush (I now remove them and leave them at home) the ONLY time I have ever seen an iron sight come loose was on a C1 which I imagine had many thousands of rounds through it as well as multiple rides on a Huey (without a visit to an armourer) before deciding that the front sight should come loose. Maybe a quick fix is a little nail polish or loctite if this a common issue for people.
 
Last edited:
tokguy said:
I have often pondered if 'advancing age' isn't just an excuse to buy the great glass. I think good glass is easier to make 'Hail Mary' shots that we wouldn't be able to make with irons...Shooting offhand with glass seems boring, and I like being entertained... even challenged. Good glass seems to take a lot of the challenge away; you can make shots that remove a lot of the sport of it IMO. Don't have to look for long in 'Hunting' to find a Nimrod boasting of 400 - 600 yard shots... do you?
Click to expand...

I just can't get my head around this kind of thinking. The challenge of hunting should be the hunting rather than the shooting; Hail Mary shots have no place in my world, which seems very different than yours.

If you want a shooting challenge, then shoot targets. If you are pointing a rifle at a living animal with the intention of killing it, there should be no doubt in your mind that you can make that shot. If the shot itself is going to be a challenge, don't whine about it being "boring"...just challenge yourself to get closer...i.e. to hunt.

I won't go so far as hoyt does in stating that he won't consider shooting an animal with irons. I still enjoy using iron sights (apertures) when I can...meaning that the lighting conditions are excellent, the range is short and i can get the sight picture I want. I know full well that i probably will not get a critter when using irons, but that will be because I pass up an imperfect shot...and the vast majority of them will be imperfect.

Most of the time, when you hear a guy say "I had to take the shot...it was the only opportunity I had!" you can rest assured that he didn't have an opportunity...but he simply had to pull that trigger, because he simply had to kill something, without regard for his personal limitations and those of his equipment.
 
I don't view iron sights as a "back up" in case of a scope failure and I'm not sure why many keep referring to them as such. With a quality QD scope mount system, iron sights come in handy when following game in tight bush or when quick shots at close range are necessary. I've never had to use my irons as a back up due to a scope failure, but I've removed the scope numerous times when following game in dense cover.
As others stated, my eyes aren't good enough anymore to use irons as a primary sight and I'd have to keep my shots to under 100 yds, and that's not something I feel like limiting myself to nor is it practical for my type of hunting.
 
jjohnwm said:
I just can't get my head around this kind of thinking. The challenge of hunting should be the hunting rather than the shooting; Hail Mary shots have no place in my world, which seems very different than yours.

If you want a shooting challenge, then shoot targets. If you are pointing a rifle at a living animal with the intention of killing it, there should be no doubt in your mind that you can make that shot. If the shot itself is going to be a challenge, don't whine about it being "boring"...just challenge yourself to get closer...i.e. to hunt.

I won't go so far as hoyt does in stating that he won't consider shooting an animal with irons. I still enjoy using iron sights (apertures) when I can...meaning that the lighting conditions are excellent, the range is short and i can get the sight picture I want. I know full well that i probably will not get a critter when using irons, but that will be because I pass up an imperfect shot...and the vast majority of them will be imperfect.

Most of the time, when you hear a guy say "I had to take the shot...it was the only opportunity I had!" you can rest assured that he didn't have an opportunity...but he simply had to pull that trigger, because he simply had to kill something, without regard for his personal limitations and those of his equipment.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly......
 
jjohnwm said:
I won't go so far as hoyt does in stating that he won't consider shooting an animal with irons.
Click to expand...

I go that far because I cant see irons and the target both, no matter which I focus on... peeps worked for a few years, but no longer. It is scopes or hang up the rifles.
 
I've shot more game with irons than scopes. Personally I wouldn't consider going on a multiday hunt without irons and a means of removing the scope, I've taken too many spills and tumbles to really completely on something made of glass.
 
Gatehouse said:
I will always choose a scope or even a red dot over iron sights. I've had a scope fail on a hunt but didn't know it until I shot it at an animal, saw where the bullet was hitting and corrected. Stopping, removing the scope and then going wiht irons woouldn't have worked anyways. The whole "iron sights in case your scope fails" thing is pretty moot as long as you use good optics. Many of my rifles and scopes have taken a real beating and I've never felt the need for "back up" irons.

If a rifle comes with actually GOOD irons, there isn't any reason to remove them. Like on my 375 Ruger, they are good iron sights. I've replaced lots of poor iron sights on rifles I choose to use irons on (like most lever rifles, thier sights suck)

Bottom line- If a rifle came with good irons, I won't take them off, but I sure won't add them to a rifle I intend to use with a scope.
Click to expand...

This right here - couldn't have stated my opinion better...
 
My Fathers generation (born early 1940s) never used scopes until Quebec passed their 'buck-only' rule. They needed scopes to see antlers/no antlers and that was it. That generation isn't known for missing animals because they didn't have scopes.
I'll take the heat and admit I like see-thru Weaver rings on my Rem. 7600. The irons are great for quick target acquisition, then scope for the shot. I always like to hunt with a gun with back-up irons since I worry about scope failure or breakage.
 
I had a set of see through mounts on my rifle, and it was handy to have sometimes. When the scope lens was all wet, or full of balsam needles, or if you fell down and knocked the scope out of alignment, it was nice to have a backup plan.
Now my eyes are no good for looking through irons, so it doesn't matter if I have them on the rifle.
I just choose my walks more carefully, and use the Butler Creek scope covers to keep the lens clean.
 
Could only see my self using them if I was in deer camp or out on an extended trip. Most my hunting is not that way, fall and break my optic. I will just go home lol.

Even still, at deer camp that is why there is a back up/loaner gun or two always kicking around.

Not a terrible idea, would just need a trip back to the truck for the multi tool to remove broken optic and use the irons back up sights. Just dont think I would ever be in such DIRE need of that option... Maybe if I live in a more remote area. Who knows... My buddy tumbled down a beaver damn (about 20 ft) with his axis and cheapo combo scope... It took a good hit and was fine.. bagged a deer that day with it.
 
I like the option of having iron sights on my rifles. for lets say an emergency. it's cheaper for company's to build rifles without iron sights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom