Vernier Sights-Attributes of an Excellent One?

[John Boy]

There are several mid and long range vernier sights on the market. Without getting into the naming of Who (Brand Names) - what are the specific construction and features that classifies a vernier sight to be more accurate and of a higher quality construction than others?

Why ask? Because there are several verniers that are favored over others and users say that the one they are using is the best - but I have never read the specific whys they are the best compared to the others. And I have never bought them all and compared each to the other.

PS: I am not looking to buy my 1st vernier. IIRC, I have a combination of 7 or 8 non -Soule and Soule mid and long range verniers of a couple of brands. And each brand serves me well for the specific rifle

[McLintock]

I'd say the main consideration in a tang sight is repeatibility in the sight settings and overall slop in the adjusting mechanisum. If you're trying to get on target at a known distance, say the rams in Silhouette, then you should know a setting to start at, and it has to be consistent every time you put it on that setting. Then, after a couple shots to warm the barrel and you're off that target, you start adjusting, and when you reverse directions, you don't want anymore slop then a bare minimum so you don't have to adjust or compensate for it overly much. Basically, in theory, the higher quality of the sight, and a higher price should reflect a higher quality, the less slop and higher repeatibility you should have. I'd say only trial and error can tell you if you have a good sight, although with a high price you assume you're going to get high quality. I think, I almost confused myself saying all that.
McLintock

[wills]

Ok without mentioning brands, there is one marked on both sides of the staff.

[montana_charlie]

I'd say the main consideration in a tang sight is repeatibility in the sight settings and overall slop in the adjusting mechanisum.
That is what is usually mentioned when describing 'quality' vernier sights.

When you consider how they work...what it takes to put the aperture at the right setting...it comes down to how clear the inscribed marks are. Of course, a 'spongy' feel from a sloppy lead screw is a sign of mismatched parts, but it is just an 'elevator' which raises the aperture.

Where the aperture gets positioned is solely dependent on what you see with your eye when you look at the vernier and staff markings. You could do without a lead screw entirely...if your fingers were sensitive enough.
An exception to this would exist if there were 'clicks' to be felt while adjusting without watching things move. Then repeatability...the positioning of the aperture when a click was felt...would be important.

So, while tight lead screws are nice to operate, the most important construction feature of a vernier sight (to me) is how closely fitted the staff is to it's base...or Soule mechanism.

Any side-to-side rocking (especially in a Soule sight) shows me how well it is put together.

[Bullshop]

All good points, repeatability, readability, and ability to read from both sides.
I would like to add durability. If I am paying from $300.00 to $500.00 for a sight I want it to last till Jesus comes back.
I can think of one especially that is more beafy than others and every bit as presise, but alas is also the most expensive.
BIC/BS

[e15cap]

Maybe that is the reason it is the most expensive. Quality costs.

[Bent Ramrod]

The big advantage of a Vernier scale is that it is independent of the wear on the elevating and windage screws. If the lines line up, it doesn't matter how much backlash there is in the screws.

So I would say a combination of precision in the line spacing and readability.

[pls1911]

Sorry.... I'm passionate about Lee Shaver products and service.....
I've found none more personal or knowledgeable.
Google for data.

[Bullshop]

pls1911
Oh now you went and done it didnt ya, ya named names. Well if we kin do that then I am gona say Baldwin.

[Jon K]

pls1911,

Since you went and named names, I had 3 of them and all got tight and bound up at upper and lower extremes and was too shiney with glare, making it hard to read the scale.

My current sights are easy to read beefy and durable. Oh.....and smooth. Costly yes, but if you buy cheap you get cheap.

Jon

[Dan Cash]

I won't name names but the initials are Hoke. Sights clearly marked on both sides and any natural wear can be adjusted out of them in less than one minute.
Dan

[montana_charlie]

I have a Soule sight from one of the makers named above.

It is well-fitted, and (once locked onto a setting) is very dependable.
The markings on the staff are sharp, and clear...but not so on the vernier scale.

Those short lines are wider on one end than the other, resembling little exclamation marks, with the wide end adjacent to the staff lines. They look like they were cast in place, rather than cut.

The Soule windage drum has no slop in it, and does not allow the staff to rock side-to-side.
But the windage lines appear to be 'painted on', rather than inscribed, and the staff does not sit exactly 'at mechanical center' when the zero on the knob is aligned with the reference mark.

Since I am not a match shooter, I don't need to change sight settings often. Therefore, the inadequacies of this 'economy grade' Soule sight are not a handicap for me.
But, (and I haven't examined one) I would certainly hope that this maker's 'super grade' Soule is finished more carefully.

CM

[Dave B]

Why would you not want to name the mfg. My crystal ball is cloudy today.

[John Boy]

Why would you not want to name the mfg. My crystal ball is cloudy today.
Dave, because manufacturer names is not the subject of the thread. There are several high end brands with equal quality and several low end brands with lesser quality. It's what are the specific construction and features that classifies a vernier sight to be more accurate and of a higher quality construction than others that we are trying to discuss

And pls1911 had to drift off the thread discussion. [smilie=1: There are several brand names of equal high quality and BPCR shooters are the same as car buyers ... Porsche - Ferrari or Lamborghini

Examples:
Quality - scale is precision machine cut with MOA and sub MOA adjustments, plus two machine cut windage adjustment scales that are locking thread adjustable

Lesser Quality - scale cast in the staff with MOA adjustment and no sub MOA adjustment. Some with only sliding ocular cast windage adjustment scale and some with no windage adjustment at all

It's WHAT in the box - not the NAME on the box!

[Bullshop]

I have a long range delux model that seems to have some features some others do not have.
It has the scale on both sides of the staff.
It has an adjustable base to accomadate different hole spacings.
It has the lead screw inside the staff, not sticking out like a sore thumb.
The lead screw is calibrated in tenths. That gives the ability to really fine tune a setting. A vernier scale can divide a point into fifths, then the lead screw can divide those fifths into tenths. Hope I said that wright.
It is a little beefier than some of the exact replica sights that cost more. I have used some of those expensive replica sights that seemed awfully frail.
The best part is it is not one of the most expensive sights.
I like it !!!
BIC/BS

[EDG]

The one feature that matters to everyone is that the staff not rock from side to side.
Competitors like the precision and repeatability of the better sights but for those of use that do not change elevation much a lot of the precision is not used. In addition if you know how to keep all the back lash out of lathe cross slide you can work with a less precision sight using the same technique.

[Bullshop]

For you guys not changing elevation much or at all why buy a vernier sight?
The vernier scale is for making precise repeatable adjustments. If you dont need that feature its much cheaper to go with the tang mounted hunting type sight such as the Marbles or Lyman. Fully adjustable for windage and elevation just lacking the repeatable
precision. Also less prone to breakage.
BIC/BS

[McLintock]

I've got the Marbles on 5 or 6 guns, both lever and single shot, that I use for Long Range shooting in Cowboy Action matches, and out to 3-400 yards or so they are totally repeatable. I have made a chart that shows all my rifles and various distances out to 500 yards, and then for each rifle/yardage point I put in clicks of elevation and windage clicks from a certain side, left or right. On all rifles, they're moved around a lot for various matches and practice, and I can set the number of clicks and they're always right on. Like Bullshop says, they work great for hunting and anything short of Silhouette competition. I like them particularly well for something like Cowboy Action, because in a lot of matches they won't tell you distances, so you make your best gestimate, and if you're off on the first shot, you can count clicks real easy and fast to make a quick adjustment. And now that Marbles has the model with interchangeble staffs, they'll work out to further distances than before.
McLintock

[405]

Sorry.... I'm passionate about Lee Shaver products and service.....
I've found none more personal or knowledgeable.
Google for data.

Agree about Lee Shaver service. Also agree with MtCharlie on the assessment of that particular Soule sight.

Also, I think as others have stated, that precision fit and lack of side to side staff wobble is a big part of what makes for a good sight. Reading the scales is a real bugger if past 50 and require reading glasses to eat breakfast successfully. :mrgreen: Clarity and simplicity is a must.

Short story---- I had a problem in finding a tang sight to fit an older gun. All that was needed was to drill and countersink a hole in the base to a little different spacing than normal Sharps, etc. Since the gun is old and original I was not about to drill and tap the tang! You'd think not a big deal to find one of the makers to drill a single hole in a slightly different place. Wrong! I called around to three of the well known sight makers. No luck and NO HELP. Pretty discouraging because I really like the sights from one of those makers. :mad: I won't name these makers but I'd like to!

I called the Lee Shaver shop. A fellow answered the phone. He didn't talk to me like I had three eyeballs in my forehead.... nice change:) I gave him the hole spacing I needed for the base screws. He double checked the spacing while I was talking to him. In the shop, he had exactly the same model gun that I have. I gave him the length of the two needed tang screws along with their diameter and thread pitch. Three days later I receive the sight at my door!!! The base holes are in the right place and the mounting screws are correct!!! So, I have an old original gun that has a very usable sight correctly fitted to it. And, the gun maintains its unmolested condition.

[John Boy]

OK Gentlemen - here is the Lucky Stirke Hit Parade of what are the specific construction and features that classifies a vernier sight to be more accurate and of a higher quality construction than others?

So, who wants to be the expert and define what vernier sight(s) have all or most of these features and ... what is the longest distance that you regularly shoot with the sight(s) ... accurately?

• repeatability in the sight settings
• overall slop in the adjusting mechanism
• one marked on both sides of the staff
• how clear the inscribed marks are
• a 'spongy' feel from a sloppy lead screw is a sign of mismatched parts
• the most important construction feature of a vernier sight (to me) is how closely fitted the staff is to it's base...or Soule mechanism.
• Durability
• any natural wear can be adjusted out of them in less than one minute.
• markings on the staff are sharp, and clear
• Soule windage drum has no slop in it, and does not allow the staff to rock side-to-side
• adjustable base to accommodate different hole spacings
• The lead screw is calibrated in tenths
• vernier scale can divide a point into fifths, then the lead screw can divide those fifths into tenths.
• the staff not rock from side to side.
• Fully adjustable for windage and elevation
• less prone to breakage.

I have 10 rifles in calibers of 22 + 25-20 + 38-55 + 45 Colt - 45-70 and 45-75 with vernier sights.

... Have a cheap $65 vernier on the 22 and 25-20. Use them for 25yd Schuetzen off hand matches. Am averaging 190 to 205 - out of max 250 pts on 25 circle German Ring Targets. The bulls eye on these targets is the size of a pencil eraser. My scores may even get better using these cheap sights. Finally figured what my sight picture - squeeze should be to get more 20 - 25 ring hits

... The $35 vernier on the 45 Colt pump will shoot 3-4" groups at 200yds

... One 38-55 has a LR Creedmoor sights that I paid less than $200 for. It will consistently knock down Rams in variable winds. The other 38-55 has a $225 Soule and will do the same to the Rams

... The 45-70's all have LR Creedmoor sights, again I paid less than $200 for. These rifles are used for paper and steel: 200 - 500m, 800 - 900 and 1000yd paper. If you want to see some 1000yd hits in a 10" and 20" circle - can oblige

... The 45-75 also has the less than $200 LR Creedmoor and have a target with multiple holes in the 10 ring and X at 300yds

And all the verniers, excluding the ones mentioned, are one Italian brand, are accurate and cost less than $200 (prices have gone up though) and have the attributes mentioned below or don't have the deficiencies mentioned except scale on both sides of the staff. For the life of me, cannot figure why this is even necessary

I keep hearing X - Y - H and B, costing several hundred dollars more than I paid are the most accurate. Prove it with target pictures at multiple distances PS: 100yd targets don't count! But I do have one 100yder that 14 bullets made one jagged small hole about an 1.5 x 0.5"

And here's the deal: Lend me one of your high end 'better accuracy' verniers and I'll do a comparison using the same rifle and recipe with the targets posted. Yes, the sight will be returned

[Bullshop]

John, pard the deally there for me at least with the staff marked on both sides is that I can read it no matter what side of me the sun is on. If your at the shooting line at an event you cant turn your gun arround to light the other side of the staff as it will get you tossed from the line if it points anywhere but down range.
Way much easier for my old eyes to just tip the rifle to one side or other depending on where the sun is.
Really the single position accuracy has little to do with quality of the sight. You could weld a washer to the barrel and do some good shooting with it. For long range precision where the angle of entry of the boolit is so steep it requires extreamly precise repeatable adjusting capability to accuratly adjust the sight to a very small increment. Remember the buffalo size target you see at 1000 yards is not the same size target the boolit sees at the same range.
You can do some darn good shooting with a tasco scope at less than a C note on a good rifle but companies like Zise and Shmit & Bender sure sell lots of scopes. Do ya suppose its just because folks got more money than sence or is it quality?
How bout this, when the US shooting team took on the Irish at Creedmoore do you think anyone used economy sights? Why not? I bet there was plenty of cheaper sights available. I also bet to the man on either side they used the best obtainable.
It is good to hear that the Itallian's have finally figured out that making good guns is not enough but they need to put good sights on them too. You have to admit that the earlier Itiallian sights were very poor. I have been seeing what looks like better quality from Itally but didnt what to be first to try them.
BIC/BS

[Cimarron Red]

Hi, John Boy,

Let me add one feature that a good vernier sight should have that I have not seen here yet -- perhaps I missed it. The staff should be adjustable fore and aft on the base. The reason is that, given the high midrange trajectories of most of the cartridges chambered in single-shot rifles, the muzzles of these guns are elevated quite a bit above level. This means that if the sight staff is plumb with the rifle's bore, the aperture will appear somewhat oval as the shooter forms his sight picture. This will become more pronounced as ranges increase. So, to counter this, the staff should lean slightly forward. On better sights such an adjustment is provided for. I use a Baldwin, and it has a slotted spring that can be moved forward and backward to effect this adjustment. I believe that MVA's employ a similar arrangement.

As Bullshop states -- assuming a tight, well made sight -- group size is no indication of sight quality. Accuracy of adjustment and repeatability are the most important qualities. Under match conditions, should a wind or mirage shift demand a two minute windage adjustment, your sight must capable of moving two minutes -- no more, no less -- assuming your spotter has read the conditions accurately. Similarly, the sight must be capable of returning to the original zero. Of course, this applies to elevation as well.

For informal shooting, I believe that lower priced sights are perfectly adequate. But I also believe that in games such as BPCR silhouettes or BPCR Target Rifle, especially Creedmoor matches, high quality sights are required. I take my cue from my fellow competitors. I have before me the Final Results Bulletin from the 2007 BPCR National Championships held at the Whittington Center. ( I have the 2008 bulletin, also, but at this moment I can't lay my hands on it.) Included in these bulletins are competitor equipment lists. In 2007 the respondents stated they used the following rear sights:

Montana Vintage Arms ....... 85 shooters
Steve Baldwin ....... 32
Browning ....... 13
Kermit Hoke ....... 10
Ron Long ....... 9
Lee Shaver ........ 8
Ukranian (Parts Unknown?) ........ 8
Kelly ....... 5
Harold Forcum ......... 3
Pedersoli ......... 3
Ballard, M. Stevens, P. Roy &
Zika ......... 1 each

My assumption is that these shooters are rational men who will use the best equipment they can afford because they want to shoot as well as they can. Others may draw conclusions that differ from mine, however.