Thinking of hunting without optics this year...

Silverado

Silverado

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 98.6%
143   2   1
I was having a good time today at the range shooting irons; enough so that I'm thinking of eschewing optics on my rifles for this season.

My roster includes my Ruger Hawkeye Alaskan in 375 Ruger, Sako 85 Bavarian Carbine in 30-06, and Ruger Scout Rifle in 308.

The sights on both Rugers are fast and easy. Those on the Alaskan limit the best use of the cartridge's ballistics somewhat, as they are not adjustable for elevation, and regulated for a 50 yard zero. That's still minute-of-moose-vitals out to about 220, so not bad.

Of the three, the open sights I like the least are actually on the Sako. The rifle is pure quality, but the irons are a black front blade and a black rear square notch. I'm concerned that they will be hard to see on a moose or bear?

Some more range time throughout the week should answer the question well enough, and perhaps some carefully applied white paint on the blade will make the difference. Would love to find a white or brass post/blade replacement though!

Any other suggestions?

Who else hunts strictly with open sights?
 
Last edited:
I have used a dab of White-out on the front blade of Patridge sights so I could see it at first legal light. The problem for me with using iron sights when hunting isn't the ability to place hits; big game kill zones are quite large and as rifle shooting goes tend to be close. The problems are low light and threading bullets through brush. Its a lot easier to miss twigs and find holes when you can see them.
 
I can still shoot apertures quite well, but open "V" or "U" notch rear sights are too fuzzy for these tired old eyes.

The only rifles I have iron [read aperture] sights on are my M94 lever action Winchesters, a 30-30 and a 38-55.

Dave.
 
You'l notice all these have something in common, almost haven't used a scope on anything over 100lbs, ever, anywhere. I say almost because there are a few stragglers with scoped borrowed rifles, such as a some culling when you just get handed a rifle, I don't count those. Not pure hunting. All of my sport hunting has been done with iron sights, and nothing else. I find you are at a slight disadvantage that only applies when you can't stalk inside 200 yards, and that makes it fun. 200 is as far as I want to shoot, and even that I try and avoid because I find it dull. I love the sporting aspects of being forced to get closer, and the "open" experience of irons in the field. For dangerous game, it's all I'll ever use, as I age and my eyes worsen I'll just have to get closer. This is just what's in my photo bucket album, lots more irons kills. I'd highly recommend irons, it's about 5% of the way to bow hunting, but for me provides an experience, clean carry, and more durable package afield I really appreciate. There's something about the way an iron sighted rifle feels when it's shouldered that just tells you it's right.

This is an irons shot from a double rifle on Gemsbok in the Kalahari I made in February, we were getting busted day after day stalking at as far as 300 yards. The animals were in top condition, note all the green the rains had just come, and had no shortage of energy. I ended up getting as close as I was going to that afternoon, and took a rather challenging double rifle irons shot. We're waiting for my bull to turn in the beginning,





[URL=http://smg.photobucket.com/user/angusmo/media/Hunting/IMG_6730-Version3_zpsdbad5acf.jpg.html]
[/URL]











 
Last edited:
I should add, I imagine it's much the same as it is for bowhunters. If you encounter a shot your equipment won't let you make, that other equipment would have, you don't feel let down in the least. You just weren't able to hunt and take it your way, and there's no loss in that. There is more "hunting" when using a more primitive method, and that in itself provides a beautiful experience. Not that you face a very serious disadvantage with irons, just a very slight, enjoyable one.
 
I have taken lots of game over irons, deer, bear, hog, moose etc.... growing up, it was all I ever had and money was tight.... Now that I can afford to purchase what I want I still have a few rifles that I take out that are iron sighted....

What I have found over the years is that I have started to gravitate towards lower powered optics when I do scope a rifle.... usually in either 1-4 or 2-7 configurations..... This may be due to the areas where I generally hunt in that a 200 yard shot is a rarity.... My highest powered optic is on my .223 (coyote rifle) and even it's only a 4-12.....

I really like the 1-4 configuration... to me, it is almost like having a really accurate set of irons when on 1x.... A good 1-4 optic with a nice fine reticle is good for me out past 150..... and on the rare chance I need it, the magnification is there.... Then there are some rifles like Ruger number 1's that I wouldn't even think about putting an optic on.... It would ruin the carry experience for me.... to each their own as they say.....

scoutwithscope_zps1bd8e72b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ardent said:
I should add, I imagine it's much the same as it is for bowhunters. If you encounter a shot your equipment won't let you make, that other equipment would have, you don't feel let down in the least. You just weren't able to hunt and take it your way, and there's no loss in that. There is more "hunting" when using a more primitive method, and that in itself provides a beautiful experience. Not that you face a very serious disadvantage with irons, just a very slight, enjoyable one.
Click to expand...


You sir have taken some beautiful animals


3016275-chuck_norris-thumbs-up.jpg
 
Dogleg said:
I have used a dab of White-out on the front blade of Patridge sights so I could see it at first legal light. The problem for me with using iron sights when hunting isn't the ability to place hits; big game kill zones are quite large and as rifle shooting goes tend to be close. The problems are low light and threading bullets through brush. Its a lot easier to miss twigs and find holes when you can see them.
Click to expand...

These things exactly. Plus I will add that where I hunt there are almost always antler restrictions so before I pull the trigger I like to confirm with my scope what I have already seen in my binoculars.
 
It's a myth that you can shoot through brush easier with a scope. The line of sight is much higher with a scope than with irons. Yes, you can see the branch, but missing it, when you are aiming close to it, is still a gamble.

Me, I hunted exclusively with iron sights for the first 35years or so of my hunting career. Only reduced ability to see irons in low light makes me use them at times now. A good receiver sight is a wonderful thing.
 
I applaud your decision to use open sights!

I use them in the model 94 and ruger number 1 for deer hunting incertain times for certain types of hunting!

You learn to be a better hunter with Opens, as opposed to sitting back 350m an letting one rip.. chances are you will have to cover 200m or so to take a shot to be sure... that's my kinda huntin!

Enjoi an be suurrre to post photos

WL
 
I like irons but I only use them exclusively on my 1885 in 45-70, #1H in 458, M98 9.3x62 and my 470 Double. Still there is nothing better than stalking in close and irons rule in that situation.
 
John Y Cannuck said:
It's a myth that you can shoot through brush easier with a scope. The line of sight is much higher with a scope than with irons. Yes, you can see the branch, but missing it, when you are aiming close to it, is still a gamble.

Me, I hunted exclusively with iron sights for the first 35years or so of my hunting career. Only reduced ability to see irons in low light makes me use them at times now. A good receiver sight is a wonderful thing.
Click to expand...


I take a lot of comfort from that myth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom