opinions on aperture sights

[W.R.Buchanan]

Agreed and that was my point to make sure you use the right size for the conditions. I have vernier sights with Hadley cups that give you the greatest flexibility and and peep/rear aperture sights that are not immediately adjustable. Regardless, you need a big enough hole in low light conditions to see well.

Hence Ghost Rings. But you are still focusing on the Front Sight it might be a little fuzzy but it is still clear enough to easily hit a target at Close Range. Those sights are not made for Pinpoint Accuracy. There will always be tradeoffs.

Randy

[huntinlever]

Hence Ghost Rings. But you are still focusing on the Front Sight it might be a little fuzzy but it is still clear enough to easily hit a target at Close Range. Those sights are not made for Pinpoint Accuracy. There will always be tradeoffs.

Randy

Might be chasing my tail on this, but at the end of the day for me it's about killing well, not my ego or convenience (speaking personally, only. What I mean is that I had to reckon with my primary ethic of killing well, which may preclude my using the peep, my strong preference for other reasons - tradition and better carry in the field and saddle, being a couple - notwithstanding). That said, pleasant surprise in that a cheap pair of lower power readers changed things dramatically. Eye doc this week dials this in better I hope.

Any opinions or experiences yourself or others would offer as to a hunting option on big game, as opposed to the pure pleasure of shooting at the range or in long-range competitions, with variable distances but not more than say 125 yards? What I think I'm trying to ask is for those who hunt with a peep, what are your acceptable tradeoff parameters in terms of target and distance "fuzziness" if front sight is good, or how do you deal with things like low light or sunlight "drift?" Do most of you hold hunting with a peep to 50 yards, let's say, or is it a kind of experiential learning curve to just "get it" that a certain blurriness is normal and, more, doesn't mean a bad kill -because like a lot of things, it can't be described but just has to be learned - you just "know" how to use a peep, in practice?

Lotta' words, sorry. Just been through this several times and obviously haven't let this go.

[FergusonTO35]

The one and only thing I really don't like about sights is that (to my eyes at least) none of them will ever offer a clear and bright a view in dim light as even a cheap scope can provide. Biggest deer I ever took was on a gloomy November evening. One shot from my Marlin with a little Weaver 1-3x20 put the slug right where it needed to be and he dropped like a rock. If I was using sights, I don't know if I could have placed the bullet exactly where it needed to go as he only gave about 2 seconds to shoot. If it didn't strike quite the middle of the vitals he could have run off and become a buzzard buffet.

[RSAPD]

Might be chasing my tail on this, but at the end of the day for me it's about killing well, not my ego or convenience (speaking personally, only. What I mean is that I had to reckon with my primary ethic of killing well, which may preclude my using the peep, my strong preference for other reasons - tradition and better carry in the field and saddle, being a couple - notwithstanding). That said, pleasant surprise in that a cheap pair of lower power readers changed things dramatically. Eye doc this week dials this in better I hope.

Any opinions or experiences yourself or others would offer as to a hunting option on big game, as opposed to the pure pleasure of shooting at the range or in long-range competitions, with variable distances but not more than say 125 yards? What I think I'm trying to ask is for those who hunt with a peep, what are your acceptable tradeoff parameters in terms of target and distance "fuzziness" if front sight is good, or how do you deal with things like low light or sunlight "drift?" Do most of you hold hunting with a peep to 50 yards, let's say, or is it a kind of experiential learning curve to just "get it" that a certain blurriness is normal and, more, doesn't mean a bad kill -because like a lot of things, it can't be described but just has to be learned - you just "know" how to use a peep, in practice?

Lotta' words, sorry. Just been through this several times and obviously haven't let this go.

I'm sure lots of input and opinions on this Paul and of course, I can only give you mine. I am like you in that my primary concern with hunting is an ethical kill, so I will only take a shot that I know can efficiently kill the animal. My dad brought me up with 1 shot, 1 kill and I have always lived by that. Really sad the number of hunters i encounter that seem to be the least bit concerned with sparing an animal from suffering and have a poor self-awareness of their hunting/shooting abilities. And I think ultimately this is where your question lies - does the person know their abilities. With a scope, I am confident in my abilities up to 400 yards in wind and rain to adjust to make the ethical kill. With the buckhorn sights on my 30 WCF, i am confident up to 150 yards because I am limited by energy. With rear aperture sights that are static and not adjustable, I am confident to 300yds in good lighting conditions and low light conditions I would be limited to 200 or maybe even 100. If i was using a wide variety of adjustable rear apertures, then I could adjust to the largest hole in low light conditions and get back to 300. And again, it all goes back to being confident in all the conditions are right for an ethical kill and what I just shared are best conditions parameters. All things have to signal to me I won't screw this shot up and make the animal's day miserable. The rifle I choose depends on the environment where I live. We have short hunting seasons. We only get 4 days to hunt for elk and weather and location each day can dictate the use of best rifle. I don't hunt with my Henry 357 carbine but if I did, I would be limited to 75 yards due to energy and I prefer buckhorn sights for faster target acquisition over apertures sights and open sights still work fine for me in low light conditions.

[FergusonTO35]

I tip my hat to you sir. Been shooting and hunting almost 40 years now and my max distance with a scope is like 175 on a good day from a rest. Then again, I prefer hunting in the thick woods so its not really an issue!

[W.R.Buchanan]

Huntin' Lever:

When you get your glasses have the Opto guy make them so the primary focal distance is the same as the distance to your Front Sight. This is easiest to do with progressive lenses and you are not stuck with one Focal Length which will be useless for anything other than shooting.. Instead you will have "infinity" back to some distance say 12" and then by simply moving your head up slightly the sweet spot for your Front Sight will come into focus.

He'll know what you are talking about. They make glasses for shooters all the time.

Randy

[RSAPD]

Huntin' Lever:

When you get your glasses have the Opto guy make them so the primary focal distance is the same as the distance to your Front Sight. This is easiest to do with progressive lenses and you are not stuck with one Focal Length which will be useless for anything other than shooting.. Instead you will have "infinity" back to some distance say 12" and then by simply moving your head up slightly the sweet spot for your Front Sight will come into focus.

He'll know what you are talking about. They make glasses for shooters all the time.

Randy

2nd that! I have the progressive lenses and once you get used to then them just slight heads adjustments bring it all in.

[RSAPD]

I tip my hat to you sir. Been shooting and hunting almost 40 years now and my max distance with a scope is like 175 on a good day from a rest. Then again, I prefer hunting in the thick woods so its not really an issue!

And I will quantify that I mean using rest/support except for the 30 WCF. Off-hand I feel confident up to 150 with that rifle but anything else, I need to ensure I have time and proper gun hold, etc to ensure an ethical kill shot.

[pmer]

So, in you older guys' experience, will apertures allow me to shoot actual groups at 50-100 yards, or should I just go with a scope? By eliminating having to focus on the rear sight, does that bring the front sight and target into better resolution?

I know the scope will make the rifle less "handy" to some extent, but I'm willing to do that if that's what I need to do to get good groups.

Sorry about not reading the entire thread and someone else might have caught this, BUT general marksmanship skills should be mentioned here. The OP says he's focusing on the rear sight. For wing shooting focus on the target and for rifles and handguns focus on the front sight. Rear sight can be blurry but you can't tell where the muzzle is pointed if the front sight is out of focus. Same same for a aperture rear sight.

One thing I like about peep sights is you can see more of the target compared to a buckhorn but they can be hard to use at dusk and dawn.

[FergusonTO35]

I just put a fiber optic front on my Henry .45-70. Need to take it out in the evening and see how it looks.

[Griff]

Receiver sights are fine, an improvement over barrel sights, but I prefer the longer radius a tang sight provides. I have several hunting rifles with tang sights, a Sharps, 2 1885s & 2 Winchester 94s. None are what I consider a low light gun. I feel the apertures need light to be useful and accurate. All but one 1885 have globe front sights as well. I prefer a post in the globe, but on the 94s I also have a yellow filter with a hole in the center to aid contrast. I also use all for competition. None still have a barrel rear sight, dovetails filled with a blank. I either still or stand hunt. Getting a shot is strictly an "icing-on-the-cake" deal for me... the being out there is the point! Meat in the freezer is just a blessing. "Handles" on leverguns are fine as needed, but... I don't need them... yet! Well, except for the 375 Marlin, but it's strictly a "bear" gun. But, it's mostly because most of my encounters with bear have happened in lower light conditions.

[huntinlever]

I'm sure lots of input and opinions on this Paul and of course, I can only give you mine. I am like you in that my primary concern with hunting is an ethical kill, so I will only take a shot that I know can efficiently kill the animal. My dad brought me up with 1 shot, 1 kill and I have always lived by that. Really sad the number of hunters i encounter that seem to be the least bit concerned with sparing an animal from suffering and have a poor self-awareness of their hunting/shooting abilities. And I think ultimately this is where your question lies - does the person know their abilities. With a scope, I am confident in my abilities up to 400 yards in wind and rain to adjust to make the ethical kill. With the buckhorn sights on my 30 WCF, i am confident up to 150 yards because I am limited by energy. With rear aperture sights that are static and not adjustable, I am confident to 300yds in good lighting conditions and low light conditions I would be limited to 200 or maybe even 100. If i was using a wide variety of adjustable rear apertures, then I could adjust to the largest hole in low light conditions and get back to 300. And again, it all goes back to being confident in all the conditions are right for an ethical kill and what I just shared are best conditions parameters. All things have to signal to me I won't screw this shot up and make the animal's day miserable. The rifle I choose depends on the environment where I live. We have short hunting seasons. We only get 4 days to hunt for elk and weather and location each day can dictate the use of best rifle. I don't hunt with my Henry 357 carbine but if I did, I would be limited to 75 yards due to energy and I prefer buckhorn sights for faster target acquisition over apertures sights and open sights still work fine for me in low light conditions.

I don't want to hijack any further but wanted to thank you - a really rich post. I have to say, at this point, seems an easy decision for me - eye doc was awesome, dialed in perfectly (actually held a pencil tip at 30", crystal clear with some but entirely acceptable fuzziness at distance) and.....at least at this place, the glasses they quoted were as much as any rifle I'd care to buy ($1000 - $800 with insurance discount). Looks like good old scope for this old boy.

[M-Tecs]

I don't want to hijack any further but wanted to thank you - a really rich post. I have to say, at this point, seems an easy decision for me - eye doc was awesome, dialed in perfectly (actually held a pencil tip at 30", crystal clear with some but entirely acceptable fuzziness at distance) and.....at least at this place, the glasses they quoted were as much as any rifle I'd care to buy ($1000 - $800 with insurance discount). Looks like good old scope for this old boy.

If you have a Costco close I highly recommend purchasing glasses from them. Cost is the best I have found and quality is better than the places costing 5X.

[huntinlever]

If you have a Costco close I highly recommend purchasing glasses from them. Cost is the best I have found and quality is better than the places costing 5X.

Thanks, wasn't aware. Will do.

[FergusonTO35]

I've heard that aperture sights will improve things greatly, but I am just curious if they will make this a hunting-worthy rifle.

So, in you older guys' experience, will apertures allow me to shoot actual groups at 50-100 yards, or should I just go with a scope?

My biggest problem has always been nerves more than anything, shaking and difficulty getting a smooth squeeze on the trigger. If your fairly steady and can get a smooth trigger pull, groups should be no problem. When the stars align my sighted rifles make groups just as good as the scoped ones as long as I can see what I am aiming at. Another thing: a target made for a scope is probably less than optimal for sights. Best I have found is a simple black square about the same size as the front bead when aiming.

[W.R.Buchanan]

OK, When Bench Resting a Levergun You rest the gun on Your Support Hand on the rest. Then you pull forward on the fore end while pulling the buttstock into your shoulder with your firing hand. Also you want something under the buttstock to support it. Other types of rifles will require different types of holds. Springer Air rifles Require the "Artillery Hold" which allows the gun to slide back during recoil. You don't want to do this with a Heavy Recoiling Rifle as it will knock the snot out of you which makes a mess.

Use a Black Diamond Shaped Target Spot about 3-4" for 50-100 yards. That size is big enough so that you can see the bottom point on the spot clearly and index it on top of your front sight. If you have a Front Sight with a flat top you center the blade under the point of the diamond. With a bead you just have to get it as close as you can to Top Dead Center..

If you are having problems getting steady or are wobbling around while sitting at the bench, put on a big shirt or heavy coat to dampen your body tremors. You also need to be leaning into the bench which will take a lot of your movements out.

After all that getting a consistent trigger pull should be easy for every shot, and your gun should be dead solid on the rest.

Hope this helps.

Randy

[FergusonTO35]

Randy, that helps a lot. Thanks!

Gave the 94 some more exercise today and noticed a few things. My best accuracy within any given rifle shooting session is usually the first ten rounds. After that, the number of flyers increase until nearly all are flyers. I'm well aware of my nerve problems, but I'm thinking now that lever actions might be more sensitive than other guns to barrel heat. Even if the barrel is just warm to the touch, maybe that is all it takes? When hunting I can put the bullet point of aim or at least super close 9 times out of 10.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Some barrels will warp more than others and the size of the barrel makes a huge difference. Obviously heavier barrel = less flex.

Another thing to consider is Groove Diameter in your barrel. Teh SAAMI call out for .44 cal. barrels is .429+/-.002 for Pistols. For Rifles it is .431+/-.002. Obviously boolit diameter is going to make a huge difference.

My Mihec .44 cal. Molds drops at .434 so I can size them down to whatever I want. However most if not all jacketed bullets are .429, so in a Rifle they just aren't big enough because with .004 deep grooves the bullets are only getting a .002 cut on each side which may not be conducive of best accuracy. Certainly wouldn't be with cast.

Randy

[FergusonTO35]

Thanks. So, a standard 94 barrel in .30-30 is on the skinny side huh?

[Griff]

Thanks. So, a standard 94 barrel in .30-30 is on the skinny side huh?

Yes. But of more importance is to relieve any stress on the barrel at contact points. To know how much stress is on the barrel and to determine exactly what the rifle is capable of, I remove all the furniture from the front end of the gun and shoot with the only contact at the receiver. I.e. in effect, free floating the barrel. Once you establish just how good a group the rifle is capable of, you start assembling the forend, etc. and see where the points of contact are, and how to alleviate them.