Sight opinions please, plinking and hunting

[PerpetualStudent]

So I'm through hunter safety and here in WI that certificate is also a small game license. So I'm itching to take my 10-.22 takedown and go hunting for the first time. For expediency's sake this season I'll probably use the stock sights but I really don't like them and I'm looking to replace them.

The main purposes of this gun will be plinking and squirrel hunting. My background for shooting is 3 position small bore, so I learned to shoot on peep sights with a circle on the front sight. About the only thing I know for sure is I don't want a red dot. I'm leaning towards a peep sight but I'm open to a scope too. It's not an expensive gun so putting too much money into the sights doesn't seem smart.

Thoughts?

[Jack Stanley]

Peep sights are fine as long as the aperture is large enough to see through in the shady canopy of the woods . Otherwise , Nikon makes an excellent rimfire scope that worked exceptionally well for me .

Jack

[country gent]

An appeture sight with a larger appeture or no appeture ( ghost ring ) coupled with a hooded or globe front and a medium post up front works well. Fo r me small game hunting the front appeture covered more target than I liked. There are appetures that clamp onto the factory dovetail but may require a diffrent front sight with them also. A decent low power scope 1.5X - 3X gathers alot of light in the woods and can be pretty quick to use. The ruger 10-22 will give you alot of options for aftermarket parts.

[dverna]

If you have good eyes, peep sights are good. If your eyes are not so great, a low range variable scope works very well.

[725]

Having had good eyes, I'd agree that peeps are pretty good. Now however, I like a fixed 4X scope. Every time I throw it to the shoulder the sight picture is always the same. Found that consistency gives me quicker target acquisition. On a 10/.22 it's something.

[PerpetualStudent]

If you guys have any specific recommendations for scopes or peep sights, I'd welcome them. I'm honestly slightly overwhelmed by all the options for 10-22s, to say nothing of all the jargon thrown around concerning scopes.

[pietro]

.

Williams makes/sells (directly) a WGRS receiver peep sight, which uses the scope mount holes atop the rear of the receiver, mated with an accompanying correct height front sight, for the 10/22.

https://williamsgunsight.com/product/williams-fire-sight-peep-set-ruger-1022/

https://williamsgunsight.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/DSC_8265-300x300.jpg


Your best bet for a scope would be to use the scope mount/rail that should have come with the rifle, and mount a 1" tube 4x scope from WallyWorld ($29.95).




.

[montana_charlie]

My background for shooting is 3 position small bore, so I learned to shoot on peep sights with a circle on the front sight.

Thoughts?
While a front aperture is ideal on bullseye targets at predetermined distances, it doesn't work as well for animals and other oddly-shaped objects ... or when the distance is wrong for the aperture size.

I have a peep and post front on my 10-22, but it is my 'house .22' which doesn't see much use.
It works for knocking a pigeon off of the corral fence or taking a poke at a gopher that has come to investigate the front yard.

But, my 'truck .22" is an Anschutz bolt action and sports a 2 to 7 power scope.
When I need a .22 to perform, this one does.

My 'peep' is the Williams pictured above.

[Mk42gunner]

I think 95% of the squirrels I have shot were inside of thirty yards. Iron sights, either open or aperture, work okay as long there is enough light. FOr field use I prefer a post front sight, although a bead is also useable.

For plinking, anything that you can get a consistent sight picture with will work; but for hunting a scope is so much better it isn't funny.

Don't try to use one of the little 3/4" tube cheap scopes, go with just about any one inch tubed scope. Most of my .22'wear a fixed 4X, with the occasional 2.5X or low powered variables.

Robert

[Ickisrulz]

I like the Leupold 2-7x28 rimfire scope I have on my CZ452.

https://www.amazon.com/Leupold-113872-Rimfire-Duplex-Reticle/dp/B006PH6AWO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475430214&sr=8-1&keywords=leupold+2-7x28+rimfire+scope

I also like the Leupold fixed 4X I have on my 10/22.

https://www.amazon.com/Leupold-Rimfire-4x28mm-Duplex-Gloss/dp/B000MM47LO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475430282&sr=8-1&keywords=leupold%2B4x%2Brimfire%2Bscope&th=1

Both of these are smaller and look nice on the smaller 22 rifles.

[Ickisrulz]

I have one of the new Weaver 2-7x scopes on an old Colt bolt action 22. I really like this scope too. But it did leak on me and was repaired by the factory. It is very clear.

https://www.amazon.com/Weaver-Rimfire-2-5-7X28-Riflescope-Matte/dp/B0001GVRXW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475430433&sr=8-1&keywords=weaver+rimfire+scope

When purchasing a scope, take a look at Optics Planet. They have great prices and you can normally find a coupon. Shipping has always been free in my cases.

[bubba.50]

I used the sight pietro referenced on several 10-22's with good results usin' various gold, ivory, or day-glo front beads. have one on the Mossberg 12ga I take to the VFW meat shoots too.

[Jack Stanley]

What pietro said for a receiver sight is what was on mine , I did put a slightly taller front sight on it though . So the sight would be in the middle of the adjustment range .

Jack

[PerpetualStudent]

Hmmm.

I think I'll save a nice scope for when I have a nice 22. I'm leaning towards the sight Pietro mentioned, I'd run across that in my googling but I didn't want to risk 50 bucks without some endorsement from people I respect.

Scope vs peep, I buy that scopes are better (they actually told us that point blank at hunter's safety) but my impression is 50 bucks will buy only so much quality and that quality will go further on iron sights than a scope.

As always I appreciate the opinions, explanations and advice. You guys rock.

[gnoahhh]

In the world of sights and scopes, you get what you pay for. Were it me I would go with the aperture rear sight; it sounds as if your eyes can swallow it. Then, while having fun with the gun, you can save your nickels and buy a quality scope sometime down the road if you still feel that you need it. Cheap scopes are rarely a bargain- non-repeatable adjustments, image blurring in the outer edges, parallax issues, critical eye relief, poor light transmission, and general flimsiness to name but a few maladies. (I know. Now is when everybody chimes in with tales of WallyWorld Specials that survived earthquakes, monsoons, and tidal waves, and never shifted zero. Those scopes are rare as kind thoughts in Hillary's black heart.)

We as riflemen have been brainwashed into believing a gun isn't complete without a scope on it. I own more rifles equipped with only aperture rear sights than with scopes. Which ones usually get the nod for a day of wood's loafing? The iron sighted ones- because quite simply they feel better in the hand. Scoped rifles tend to end up slung over one's shoulder because it gets tiring after a while by having to adjust one's grip around the mid-section of the gun when a big old hunk of metal and glass is perched right there. If it's slung, it's not instantly available; those couple of seconds delay can spell out a missed opportunity in the squirrel/deer woods.

It's all inter-related: sight choice can effect other functions of a rifle too.

[Lead pot]

My old 39 Marlin has taken a lot of rabbits and squirrels and gophers these past 60 odd years with just the sights that came on the rifle. :)