instant peep sights

[unclebill]

i have some of these little super strong magnets stuck to my fridge.
i pried one off with a pocket knife and stuck it on my ruger.
it does not want to move around (i tried banging the gun on my couch to see if it would move)
i think i am going to paint it black and see how well it works.
after some web searching i found that i can buy all sorts of ring shaped magnets with different inside/outside diameters.

what do you guys think?

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l272/billhedges/27chevy001-11.jpg
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l272/billhedges/27chevy002-11.jpg
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l272/billhedges/27chevy005-2.jpg

[unclebill]

BTW
i only shoot targets and i love going for 100 yard clangers.
so Field of view is not an issue.

[curiousgeorge]

unclebill,

I think that I would be sure to wear a pair of safety glasses when I tried this, but yes I would try it too. Recoil from a .44 might decide to send the magnet flying.

Be careful.

Steve

[unclebill]

unclebill,

I think that I would be sure to wear a pair of safety glasses when I tried this, but yes I would try it too. Recoil from a .44 might decide to send the magnet flying.

Be careful.

Steve

i will be careful.
but i seriously doubt if it will even shift.
these things are incredibly powerful.

[missionary5155]

Good morning
That is one idea that is new to me. I figured on a washer superglued to the rear sight.

[Freightman]

Found some here!
http://www.emovendo.net/magnets/rings/

[Calamity Jake]

And how many of us see that same sight picture???? [smilie=b:

[BruceB]

"what do you guys think?"

I THINK that aperture sights on a handgun have the same utility for a shooter as a mountain bike does for a trout (Thanks, Al...great analogy).


Such "sights" fly in the face of every optical principle that makes aperture sights ON A RIFLE so valuable

-They are NOT close to the eye.

-They do NOT subtract an object that has to be aligned with other objects. That is, there are still THREE elements requiring alignment...on a rifle the aperture sight reduces this to two....the front sight and the target.

-They OBSCURE even more of the field-of-view than normal open sights.

- They do NOT allow the eye to self-center, as a rifle-mounted aperture does.

This idea for aperture sights on handguns goes the rounds every couple of months, it seems, somewhere on the 'net. For those who actually understand the proper use of aperture sights, it's a constant source of bemusement. There is simply NO redeeming quality to such rigs; they are inferior in all respects UNLESS you cozy up so close to the rear sight that one's face is endangered by the recoil.

I THINK such items should be buried and forgotten.

-

[unclebill]

"what do you guys think?"

I THINK that aperture sights on a handgun have the same utility for a shooter as a mountain bike does for a trout (Thanks, Al...great analogy).


Such "sights" fly in the face of every optical principle that makes aperture sights ON A RIFLE so valuable

-They are NOT close to the eye.

-They do NOT subtract an object that has to be aligned with other objects. That is, there are still THREE elements requiring alignment...on a rifle the aperture sight reduces this to two....the front sight and the target.

-They OBSCURE even more of the field-of-view than normal open sights.

- They do NOT allow the eye to self-center, as a rifle-mounted aperture does.

This idea for aperture sights on handguns goes the rounds every couple of months, it seems, somewhere on the 'net. For those who actually understand the proper use of aperture sights, it's a constant source of bemusement. There is simply NO redeeming quality to such rigs; they are inferior in all respects UNLESS you cozy up so close to the rear sight that one's face is endangered by the recoil.

I THINK such items should be buried and forgotten.

-
thank you for your gentle response.

good thing you dont have to like it huh?


i guess the owner of the firearm below is a delusional idiot..

[unclebill]

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l272/billhedges/DSCN1672.jpg

[unclebill]

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l272/billhedges/DSCN1668.jpg

[Bass Ackward]

There is simply NO redeeming quality to such rigs; they are inferior in all respects UNLESS you cozy up so close to the rear sight that one's face is endangered by the recoil.

I THINK such items should be buried and forgotten.

-


Wow! Well, my grandfather said that everything and everyone has some redeeming value if you can find it.

The (I'll avoid the aggravating term here) "ringed" handgun sight allows more light around the front sight than any sight ever made. So it performs in low light situations longer than other open sights or better in dark woods. And it does this without a colored or fire sight. For guys like me that don't want to bother with scopes on a handgun, this is an option.

It doesn't seem very precision as far away as it is, but comparison shooting will make you scratch your head, especially as you become used to it.

The only real disadvantage I experience with one is my proficiency beyond direct POA / POI. It .... wants for longer range use. But this is a limitation with pee ...... (excuse me) ringed sights. :grin:

[Flash]

I shot Contenders for years and used silhouette sights on Super 14's and never did I see anyone using a aperature sight on a short sight radius handgun.

The aperature is only helpful when used close to the eye, otherwise it's nothing more than looking through a hole. Sure, there are guys who will try anything and swear it works but an aperature on a handgun sight is like looking through a scope without the lens............no benefit.

[unclebill]

hmm
hey bruce
how do you REALLY feel?
dont hold back now.
i can take it.

[unclebill]

Sure, there are guys who will try anything and swear it works.


i will try anything.
and i will try this.
if it doesnt work
i hereby promise to come to this thread and swear it doesnt work.
hows that?

[wellfedirishman]

UncleBill, it actually looks worth trying. I love aperture sights on rifle, and a wide aperture rear handgun sight would be worth a try too.

I'd love to know how this works out, please keep us informed and ignore the naysayers. I have seen silhouette sights with a rear peep aperture on a Super 14 Contender barrel, so it has been done commercially before.

If you decide you don't want the magnet, I am happy to pay shipping for it :)

[Dan Cash]

I tried aperture sights years ago while shooting handgun silhouette. It did enable me to shoot slightly better groups but during competition, it was very difficult to keep track of which target was to be engaged. For me, it was not successful.

[pdawg_shooter]

"what do you guys think?"

I THINK that aperture sights on a handgun have the same utility for a shooter as a mountain bike does for a trout (Thanks, Al...great analogy).


Such "sights" fly in the face of every optical principle that makes aperture sights ON A RIFLE so valuable

-They are NOT close to the eye.

-They do NOT subtract an object that has to be aligned with other objects. That is, there are still THREE elements requiring alignment...on a rifle the aperture sight reduces this to two....the front sight and the target.

-They OBSCURE even more of the field-of-view than normal open sights.

- They do NOT allow the eye to self-center, as a rifle-mounted aperture does.

This idea for aperture sights on handguns goes the rounds every couple of months, it seems, somewhere on the 'net. For those who actually understand the proper use of aperture sights, it's a constant source of bemusement. There is simply NO redeeming quality to such rigs; they are inferior in all respects UNLESS you cozy up so close to the rear sight that one's face is endangered by the recoil.

I THINK such items should be buried and forgotten.

-

+1 I have tried them on different handguns over the years and I couldnt agree more. You push that sight 20+ inches away from your face and it is just about useless.

[ole 5 hole group]

Give it a go unclebill - it just might work for you. I know for a fact that with my "ole" eyes these work damn well better for me than irons and the only thing better is a 0.5 oz red dot. Keep both eyes open & you're good to go.

[unclebill]

i will try anything.
and i will try this.
if it doesnt work
i hereby promise to come to this thread and swear it doesnt work.
hows that?

i herby swear that the holes in my magnets are too little.

[unclebill]

Give it a go unclebill - it just might work for you. I know for a fact that with my "ole" eyes these work damn well better for me than irons and the only thing better is a 0.5 oz red dot. Keep both eyes open & you're good to go.

i want some of those real bad.

[Matthew 25]

Oh come on, Unclebill. Get the vise and a drill.

[SethD]

I think the reason peep sights work for many on a handgun in spite of not seeming to make logical sense is because with a little practice some surprisingly decent shooting can be done with no rear sight at all once you get use to it. Without a rear sight you unconsciously sight down the barrel and align the front sight with the boreline. When I was a kid I had a airgun that had a fixed rear sight badly misaligned to the point it wasn't really usable. The gun was fairly accurate though and I learned to shoot it just using a front sight by shooting a lot of dragonflies, moths, wasps and other small targets. If your familiar with the gun just using the front sight can be just as or more accurate at moderate ranges than using a rear sight as well as being a bit faster. It also puts virtually no strain on the eyes and your vision doesn't need to be great to do it.

[shunka]

My Dear Uncle Bill -

Thanks very much for the idea - I myself have been investigating and experimenting with aperture sights for handguns ever since my eyeballs suddenly become .... "less flexible" . The fact that my arisaka rifle comes equipped with a peep all the way the he77 out where a notch should be, gave me the impetus to try it. After all, I thought to myself if that peep, over a foot from my eyeball allows me to shoot inch-and-a-half groups at 100 yards with the arisaka, there must be something to it ....

Also , those of us hivernaughts who shoot the front-stuffing smokepoles and who have seen the elephant have learned long ago what a true "full buckhorn sight is: a very large ring (peep) sight with a fine notch cut into it. and the full buckhorn works VERY WELL 18" from the eye, for those who know how to use it.

Perhaps when the practitioners who proclaim "all you have to do is.. focus thus and so ...." begin to have personal experience with the aging of the eye, extreme myopia, extreme astigmatism and extreme presbyopia they might understand a tad better . ie: walk a mile in my mocassins and all ...

You have found numerous examples and they obviously work for some folks ... and not for others. Ain't it grand to live in a place where we can all choose to use something that we like but that others may vehemently complain about? [smilie=b:

For example, I myself have no use atall for Basketball or Golf or the tv airtime it takes up :kidding: )

BTW as I understand it both Ed McGivern and Elmer Kieth used peeps on handguns at various times, so we are in good company. For social purposes those gentlemen as well as Jordan preferred "instinct shooting" but they devoted time and resources practicing at a level that is beyond most of us mere mortals.

There have been interesting experiments with "peep tubes" of various shapes and lengths on handcannons also, but I cannot seem to make them work.

Please do report on how this works for you ... I am going to experiment with bent flat stock, myself.

For myself, I say good luck, screw the so-called "principles everyone knows" and go with whatever works for you!

yhs
shunka

[mdi]

"what do you guys think?"

I THINK that aperture sights on a handgun have the same utility for a shooter as a mountain bike does for a trout (Thanks, Al...great analogy).


Such "sights" fly in the face of every optical principle that makes aperture sights ON A RIFLE so valuable

-They are NOT close to the eye.

-They do NOT subtract an object that has to be aligned with other objects. That is, there are still THREE elements requiring alignment...on a rifle the aperture sight reduces this to two....the front sight and the target.

-They OBSCURE even more of the field-of-view than normal open sights.

- They do NOT allow the eye to self-center, as a rifle-mounted aperture does.

This idea for aperture sights on handguns goes the rounds every couple of months, it seems, somewhere on the 'net. For those who actually understand the proper use of aperture sights, it's a constant source of bemusement. There is simply NO redeeming quality to such rigs; they are inferior in all respects UNLESS you cozy up so close to the rear sight that one's face is endangered by the recoil.

I THINK such items should be buried and forgotten.

-
I'm sure you got all your facts from an Opthomoligst (sp?) , er, Eye expert. I have a "One Ragged Hole" Arperture sight on my Ruger SBH 7 1/2" bbl. I still focus on the front sight (which I can see much better now) and naturally center it in the rear. Mebbe I don't know how to shoot, but it works for me...

FWIW if it weren't for "such items", my Blackhawk would be buried in my safe...

[BruceB]

UncleBill;

YOU asked the question!

"What do you guys think?" So, I said what I think.

Believe me, if I'd set out to insult you, there would be no 'borderline' about it....but I did not set out to insult you.

Nor did I make any claim to be an expert, any more than I make a career as a "naysayer".

If you and your pals here get your knickers twisted by an honest expression of "what I think", I'm afraid that's too bad. It must be frustrating to not be able to say what one THINKS in the discussions in your circles. I didn't set out to step on snyone's toes. If members choose to take my comments in other than the manner they were intended...too bad, and Im ' sorry about that. I have not, however, changed how I think on the subject. As I said, I'm no expert, but my thinking is based on over fifty years of using aperture sights, including 1000-yard match shooting, handgun silhouette, and a variety of other activities with iron sights.

[markinalpine]

If you and your pals here get your knickers twisted by an honest expression of "what I think", I'm afraid that's too bad.
[smilie=p:
BruceB,
Exile them all to "The Salad Bar!"

Mark :bigsmyl2:

EDIT: Just to clarify what I just wrote, I am suggesting to BruceB that any of the little crybabies who got their little feeling hurt be sent to the Salad Bar, AKA the Shooter's Forum. I've been flamed there too, so I thought all the chronic ultra sensitive types could go there, hold hands, and sip mint tea. I am not calling on anyone to ignore BruceB.

[bhn22]

ignore BruceB??

[NVcurmudgeon]

I can hardly wait to trade off my NRA Sporter Springfield with its obselete Lyman 48 APERTURE rear sight for a Type 99 Arisaka complete with the only APERTURE rear sight out where the advantage of the optical principle is negated. Er, that will be when I can trade into a 7.7 with documentation of use by Isoroku Yamamoto.

It's high time to scrap the Patridge sights that have been standard equipment for about a century's worth of Distinguished Marksmen. If Offut Pinion was still around I'd read him the riot act for putting Bo-Mar sights on my first accurized Bullseye Colt 1911 back around 1968. That poor deluded gentleman was so fortunate that he made it onto Navy Camp Perry and Olympic teams without the advantage of APERTURE sights.

This post has been scrupulously written to avoid name calling, love y'all.

[waksupi]

Out of line, Unc.

[unclebill]

I can hardly wait to trade off my NRA Sporter Springfield with its obselete Lyman 48 APERTURE rear sight for a Type 99 Arisaka complete with the only APERTURE rear sight out where the advantage of the optical principle is negated. Er, that will be when I can trade into a 7.7 with documentation of use by Isoroku Yamamoto.

It's high time to scrap the Patridge sights that have been standard equipment for about a century's worth of Distinguished Marksmen. If Offut Pinion was still around I'd read him the riot act for putting Bo-Mar sights on my first accurized Bullseye Colt 1911 back around 1968. That poor deluded gentleman was so fortunate that he made it onto Navy Camp Perry and Olympic teams without the advantage of APERTURE sights.

This post has been scrupulously written to avoid name calling, love y'all.

let us know how you like your new peep sights. [smilie=l:

[unclebill]

Out of line, Unc.

i deleted the post.
no need to spread even more ill will on the intergooglyweb.

[fourarmed]

There is a trend currently popular in IHMSA silhouette of putting aperture sights on XP-100s chambered for 6mm rounds, and shooting light, high velocity bullets from the prone position. In order to use the aperture sight without the recoil smashing their faces, they install huge muzzle brakes that make the firing line untenable for about ten feet on either side. A pox on their houses!