SKS aperture sights: Raveneye vs Tech Sights

At least a peep sight setup allows u to see whats below ur target. That is my biggest complaint with Russian leaf sights. They literally cut the bottom half of ur FOV off. I run a Williams sight on my SKS. It works. But my SKS also sports a NPZ 3-9x24mm PO optic, so i obviously use that a vast majority of the time. Nutnfancy speaks very highly of the Tech sight for the SKS.
 
The only mod I did on my SKS i sold to Mike from Canmore was a tech sight ts200. It improved my group sizes at 100 yards to what I think is the best the old girl is capable of: about 2.5".
Yes, the rear ring goes fuzzy as i focus on front sight and target, but that is the point, you look through it and "lose" your rear sight to focus up front. Your eye centres it subconsciously. They return to zero perfectly after disassembly and reassembly. The only flaw I can see is that it might be the most fragile part on the rifle, given its position and materials.
I would recommend it for anything but a build that is intended for extremely rough use.
 
Ganderite said:
Yes. I threaded the receiver wall and the inside stud and installed a 1/4" bolt. Everything is solid now.

It shoot terrific 1 shot groups.
Click to expand...


"1 shot groups" is truly remarkable for an SKS... ;););) ...lol Btw, Ganderite, I have tried your mod replacing the dust cover pin with a screw, but my results were less than remarkable. Somehow the dust cover kept moving (even with blue locktite). Do you know what could be the problem? I used a 1/4-20 stainless screw.
 
Murray 3-D said:
At least a peep sight setup allows u to see whats below ur target. That is my biggest complaint with Russian leaf sights. They literally cut the bottom half of ur FOV off. I run a Williams sight on my SKS. It works. But my SKS also sports a NPZ 3-9x24mm PO optic, so i obviously use that a vast majority of the time. Nutnfancy speaks very highly of the Tech sight for the SKS.
Click to expand...
I do refer the raveneye sight over the factory leaf sight. I find it harder to pick up the front sight post with the factory leaf sight. Plus your eyes pick up the front sight post better with the peep sight and you also don't see the rest of the front sight ring, unlike with the factory leaf sight.
 
Putting a peep sight in place of the factory open sights is an improvement....but not much of one. One of the previous posters mentioned that it doesn't add much to the sight radius - which is true....but the main point is that an aperture sight needs to be (relatively) close to your eye in order to function properly. Specifically, if the aperture is close to your eye it will be fuzzy and out of focus, but your brain will still center the front post in the aperture automatically.

I have a set of Tech sights for my SKS, and have also put proper aperture sights on my Marlin 336Y and my 10/22. There really isn't any sort of iron sight that can compare to proper aperture sights. The backup irons on both of my Steyrs and my Ruger .308 are aperture sights, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Maybe I've been warped by all of the time that I spent being taught to shoot C6's, C7's, and C9's that were equipped with proper aperture sights, and then compounded the problem by spending time shooting M14ish rifles wearing irons.
 
w squared said:
Putting a peep sight in place of the factory open sights is an improvement....but not much of one. One of the previous posters mentioned that it doesn't add much to the sight radius - which is true....but the main point is that an aperture sight needs to be (relatively) close to your eye in order to function properly. Specifically, if the aperture is close to your eye it will be fuzzy and out of focus, but your brain will still center the front post in the aperture automatically.

I have a set of Tech sights for my SKS, and have also put proper aperture sights on my Marlin 336Y and my 10/22. There really isn't any sort of iron sight that can compare to proper aperture sights. The backup irons on both of my Steyrs and my Ruger .308 are aperture sights, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Maybe I've been warped by all of the time that I spent being taught to shoot C6's, C7's, and C9's that were equipped with proper aperture sights, and then compounded the problem by spending time shooting M14ish rifles wearing irons.
Click to expand...

Warped? Hell no! Aperture sights are just better in every way than using a rear leaf sight. Longer sighting radius - as you mentioned, quicker to aim, better accuracy, and they somehow sharpen your vision.

Cheers,
Neil
 
neilselden said:
and they somehow sharpen your vision.
Click to expand...

By allowing your eyes to focus on just one thing (the front sight) like it does best? Shocking, I know.

As far as your other comments about how proper aperture sights are so much superior to mounting a peep in place of buckhorn sights or (ew) just plain buckhorn sights, what are you doing applying logic and reasoning here? Don't you know that this is a firearms board on the world wide interwebs? Logic and reason have no place here - this space is reserved for conjecture and opinions based on emotions. How dare you apply logic that is verified by your own personal experience! Laugh2
 
w squared said:
By allowing your eyes to focus on just one thing (the front sight) like it does best? Shocking, I know.

As far as your other comments about how proper aperture sights are so much superior to mounting a peep in place of buckhorn sights or (ew) just plain buckhorn sights, what are you doing applying logic and reasoning here? Don't you know that this is a firearms board on the world wide interwebs? Logic and reason have no place here - this space is reserved for conjecture and opinions based on emotions. How dare you apply logic that is verified by your own personal experience! Laugh2
Click to expand...

I wish I could argue with you, but I've read enough posts here that prove your point. Without going into the politics of certain issues, I am really shocked and disappointed over how some people express themselves.

From the foolish name calling, to being megaphones for Limbaugh/Trump/white_supremacist propaganda points, to (in some cases) calling for outright violence. It is absolutely astounding to me. Or like some people who really seem to think that we live under tyranny - I think maybe people who feel that way should live abroad in a country for a year that really is screwed up and against their own people. Then come back home, and think the issue through again, with more perspective.

But back to the point: some people won't like aperture sights. Period. It may be they don't know how to use them properly, maybe because they've always used buckhorn open sights, or maybe they're just stubborn and don't like them. That's all fine and good for people who feel that way, even if I don't really understand it.

Cheers,
Neil
 
The cheap ammo for the SKS is mostly corrosive primed, therefore the rifle needs to be cleaned after each firing session.

This makes any kind of rear mounted sight problematic if it has to be removed to clean the rifle.

After farting around with one of mine for a while, I decided just to leave the original sights as is. It is not like it is sniper rifle accurate to begin with.
 
stampede said:
The cheap ammo for the SKS is mostly corrosive primed, therefore the rifle needs to be cleaned after each firing session.

This makes any kind of rear mounted sight problematic if it has to be removed to clean the rifle.

After farting around with one of mine for a while, I decided just to leave the original sights as is. It is not like it is sniper rifle accurate to begin with.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear you. But the takedown procedure with tech sights is not a big deal to me. And I shoot non-corrosive anyway.

Cheers,
Neil
 
IMO guys make too bag a deal about removing the Tech-Sight for cleaning. It's not a big deal at all and returns to zero well.

As Travis Bicklle says .... get a a Tech Sight (or KNS) target front sight. Makes a huge difference.

I do not like stock SKS/AK sights.
 
neilselden said:
I wish I could argue with you, but I've read enough posts here that prove your point. Without going into the politics of certain issues, I am really shocked and disappointed over how some people express themselves.

From the foolish name calling, to being megaphones for Limbaugh/Trump/white_supremacist propaganda points, to (in some cases) calling for outright violence. It is absolutely astounding to me. Or like some people who really seem to think that we live under tyranny - I think maybe people who feel that way should live abroad in a country for a year that really is screwed up and against their own people. Then come back home, and think the issue through again, with more perspective.

But back to the point: some people won't like aperture sights. Period. It may be they don't know how to use them properly, maybe because they've always used buckhorn open sights, or maybe they're just stubborn and don't like them. That's all fine and good for people who feel that way, even if I don't really understand it.

Cheers,
Neil
Click to expand...

This does not negate the thought that things could and would be better. No offense.
I agree with the premise, but it is a defeatist "comfortable" attitude to have. Give 'em an inch and they take a mile. EVERY TIME.

I agree Canada is a paradise, but compared to what? Canada from the 70's - 80's ? The downward trend is obvious to those who are not media-brainwashed "progressives"

just my 2 cents, not meant to be an attack, just an opinion to share.
 
Hi,
I don't feel attacked at all.

I also agree with you that things could better. A lot better. We may (or not) disagree what should change, but I respect whatever differences may exist.

What bothers me is when people talk like we live under a tyrannical regime. What really angers me is when people act as though there is no hope of change through democratic means. And what I find absolutely disgusting is when people advocate for change through violent means.

Cheers,
Neil
 
neilselden said:
Hi,
I don't feel attacked at all.

I also agree with you that things could better. A lot better. We may (or not) disagree what should change, but I respect whatever differences may exist.

What bothers me is when people talk like we live under a tyrannical regime. What really angers me is when people act as though there is no hope of change through democratic means. And what I find absolutely disgusting is when people advocate for change through violent means.

Cheers,
Neil
Click to expand...

Again, not trying to pick a fight, but I do see things differently with this comment. What change will happen?
Old stock Canadians are being out-bred 3-1 , who do you think, or where do you think our future is headed?

There is hope, never become hopeless. Democracy or the illusion thereof "may" not be the solution though.
 
Junction said:
Again, not trying to pick a fight, but I do see things differently with this comment. What change will happen?
Old stock Canadians are being out-bred 3-1 , who do you think, or where do you think our future is headed?

There is hope, never become hopeless. Democracy or the illusion thereof "may" not be the solution though.
Click to expand...

Hi,
Sorry for the delay, but I was away. :)

No sweat at all about picking a fight - I feel that we're having a conversation.

I can't really say what our future holds, or who will be making large and critical decisions in our society. Although I can say that since we have democratic means to express our thoughts and beliefs, and to influence our society, then we are bound to use those means. Without getting into the politics of it, I think we saw that come to life when Harper's Conservatives came to hold a majority government. That's my personal philosophy on that.

In practical terms, in some measure, it means exactly what a lot of folks in this community are doing. They're launching legal challenges. They are organizing like minded people to express their views with a louder voice. For some people, it may even mean getting more personally involved in politics.

Last thing for now, I really do appreciate the conversation.

Cheers,
Neil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom