OT- Iron sights, or, rather the lack there of

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Mon May 31, 2010 12:14 pm

I was thinking about a rifle in .308 again the other day. I don't have a centerfire rifle that's accurate enough to do much more than make noise; poor M44 did too much service. Like all my endeavors I am trying to do it as cheaply as I can so I start at the bottom of the price range and work my way up to something I like. The one thing that really gets old is the fact that you have to look for the "classic" models or the "whatever" models, that are not at the bottom, before you find them with iron sights from the factory. Now it's no mystery why they are like that, supply and demand, but it sure is frustrating.

I don't see why iron sights couldn't be an option like blued/stainless, wood/synthetic, right/left handed. I don't know, maybe it's just me.

Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.

airedaleman · Post by **airedaleman** » Mon May 31, 2010 12:22 pm

I'm with you. In my estimation any rifle, with the exception of heavy-barreled varmint rifles, without iron sights is useless, doesn't look finished, and unless given to me will never find a home here. I feel the same way about 22" barrels, too.

Post by **Hobie** » Mon May 31, 2010 12:37 pm

#1 Save your money for a GOOD rifle. Look at the muzzle on that M44, is it counterbored? If not that's an option to remove the muzzle wear. Most I've shot were acceptably accurate for deer and the like and that was with surplus ball. Of course you should use an expanding bullet for deer. If you want a .308 also haunt the local penny-saver and shops. A number of less desirable rifles (and many seem to be "old-fashioned" leverguns) are coming on the market as some folks dig deep to keep the bills paid. you might be able to give one a good home. Being prepared is the key to success here, you have to have cash in hand when you find the gun. If that takes selling the M44, you might start doing that now. As to sights, solve each problem as it arises. I'm no longer surprised that solutions present themselves when needed.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Mon May 31, 2010 12:42 pm

That is because most people are to lazy to learn the art of iron sights.

I have been toying with the idea of getting a front dove tail cut into my 308 H&R and mounting a peep on the rear in the scope mount holes would make it much handier walking around with.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Mon May 31, 2010 1:03 pm

Isn't the base Remington 700BDL still available with irons?

The product description sure sounds like it does:

Model 700 BDL features a hinged magazine floorplate, sling swivel studs, hooded ramp front sight, and adjustable rear sight.

Nothing bottom of the line about a 700 BDL. Mine is still capable of fine accuracy and ain't a "base" model with it's excellent wood and finish. Banged up a little now after some 25+ seasons and innumerable hunting trips.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon May 31, 2010 1:46 pm

Andrew wrote:I was thinking about a rifle in .308 again the other day. I don't have a centerfire rifle that's accurate enough to do much more than make noise; poor M44 did too much service. Like all my endeavors I am trying to do it as cheaply as I can so I start at the bottom of the price range and work my way up to something I like. The one thing that really gets old is the fact that you have to look for the "classic" models or the "whatever" models, that are not at the bottom, before you find them with iron sights from the factory. Now it's no mystery why they are like that, supply and demand, but it sure is frustrating.

I don't see why iron sights couldn't be an option like blued/stainless, wood/synthetic, right/left handed. I don't know, maybe it's just me.

Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.

In past posts here I've told the story of my Marlin MR-7 that came to me without iron sights. How my attempts to get them installed resulted in a screwed up rifle that has left me with no desire to shoot it. I hate and distrust scopes to start with so I want irons ... period.
I don't think it's a supply and demand issue. I think it's a way to make the guns cheaper and force the buyers to spend hundreds of more dollars for scopes and mounts. It wouldn't surprise me to find out the gun makers and scope makers are in cahoots over this.
Personally I'd suggest calling the maker of what ever 308 you're looking at and seeing if they will install sights. Probably won't, but if they won't you can take great pleasure in telling them why they just lost a sale.
Then go look for something else.

Joe

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon May 31, 2010 1:52 pm

Griff,

That is a breath of refreshing air, so to speak. It even looks like a real rifle. Their web site shows: "Starting at $927.00 (MSRP)", I wonder what real world retail might be? In central IL you rarely ever see a real bolt gun like that.

Joe

Sarge · Post by **Sarge** » Mon May 31, 2010 2:07 pm

I won't own a rifle that don't have iron sights on it.

I won't scope a rifle until those irons are zeroed at optimal range for the cartridge it's chambered for.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 31, 2010 4:22 pm

Sarge wrote:I won't own a rifle that don't have iron sights on it.

I won't scope a rifle until those irons are zeroed at optimal range for the cartridge it's chambered for.

Like your avatar...

My '99 came with Irons, and I just bought a better peep to replace the aftermarket oddity that had replaced the (somewhen removed) factory dovetailed sight....

I might scope it someday, but not soon.

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Mon May 31, 2010 4:57 pm

Well, I think a combat arm, or a rifle to take on a pack-in type hunt, where one is not going to be back at camp, or home at the end of the day, should probably have a set of iron sights, to fall back on, but frankly, I have never had a top quality scope or mounts fail on me, in the field. Now, if you are too cheap to buy anything by Tascos, or Walmart Bushnells, or maybe even Simmons, then maybe a set of irons should be standard equipment, along with some of those cheap Weaver tip off mounts, that you can quickly take off with only the blade of a pocket knife, if you scope fails.

However, if you install a top quality set of scope mounts, and a top quality Leupold, you will probably never have a failure in the field, although I am sure it has happened, but it's rare, these days.

Personally, I keep a lot of tradition leveractions, with only peep sights or open sights, because a scope destroys the handling qualities of those guns. But on my Scoped hunting rifles, I often remove the factory iron sights, just to get them out of the way, and I never in nearly 40 years every had a failure in the field, that made me wish I had a set of irons for back up. But then again, I don't buy junk glass, or mounts.

pokey · Post by **pokey** » Mon May 31, 2010 5:24 pm

Andrew wrote:
Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.

or a savage 99.

yup,yup,yup.

jhrosier · Post by **jhrosier** » Mon May 31, 2010 6:19 pm

Sadly, for most of us old fossils, irons are rapidly becoming a thing of the past.
It is somewhat ironic (no pun intended) that those of us who would complain most bitterly are well past the half century mark and largely unable to use open sights effectively anyhow.

I also notice that contemporary factory open sights, in many cases, are of widely variable quality.
I bumped the rear sight on a late production M94 Winchester and the blade broke and fell off.
It seems that the blade was cast of some sort of pot metal. I'm glad that it happened at home and not in the field.

I would like to see the gunmakers drill and tap for front, rear, and receiver sights and leave it to the buyer to purchase good quality sights as needed.
I doubt that drilling and tapping six extra #6 or #8 holes and providing plug screws would drive firearms manufacturers out of business.

Finding a maker for good quality steel receiver sights like those formerly made by Redfield and Lyman poses a greater challenge.

Jack

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 31, 2010 6:22 pm

pokey wrote:
Andrew wrote:
Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.
or a savage 99.

yup,yup,yup.

Having gone that route... a BLR would be "easier", if more expensive...

pokey · Post by **pokey** » Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm

Old Ironsights wrote:
pokey wrote:
Andrew wrote:
Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.
or a savage 99.

yup,yup,yup.
Having gone that route... a BLR would be "easier", if more expensive...

easier?

Old Time Hunter · Post by **Old Time Hunter** » Mon May 31, 2010 6:42 pm

First off, try the Hornady .312 150 grain PSP's for that M44 that might make a huge difference. I load 'em with 39.5 grains of H4895 that yields around 2650 fps...really made a difference for me. That being said the M44 is still the worst of the lot, probably because of the welding to put that hideous pig sticker on the front. Trade it in on a M38, you will not be displeased.

Second, Check out this:

http://cz-usa.com/products/view/cz-550-fs/

Personally I would chamber it in 6.5 X 55, but that is me.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 31, 2010 7:10 pm

pokey wrote:
Old Ironsights wrote:
pokey wrote:
Andrew wrote:
Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.
or a savage 99.

yup,yup,yup.
Having gone that route... a BLR would be "easier", if more expensive...
easier?

Assuming a full wallet...

Try buying a BLR vs a 99C sometime...

You have to hope for a good deal on an auction site for a 99, but a BLR can be bought new almost anywhere.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 31, 2010 7:11 pm

Andrew wrote:I was thinking about a rifle in .308 again the other day. I don't have a centerfire rifle that's accurate enough to do much more than make noise; poor M44 did too much service. Like all my endeavors I am trying to do it as cheaply as I can so I start at the bottom of the price range and work my way up to something I like. The one thing that really gets old is the fact that you have to look for the "classic" models or the "whatever" models, that are not at the bottom, before you find them with iron sights from the factory. Now it's no mystery why they are like that, supply and demand, but it sure is frustrating.

I don't see why iron sights couldn't be an option like blued/stainless, wood/synthetic, right/left handed. I don't know, maybe it's just me.

Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.

Wanna trade the M44 for a M91/30?

My 91/30 JUST (barely) fits in my truck...

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Mon May 31, 2010 8:48 pm

I've had decent irons put on several rifles. I like the Williams "Shorty" ramp with a sourdough blade. If you can't find sourdoughs commercially, look for them at gun shows. I've found some fine old Redfield sourdoughs for around $10-$20. I have the ramps sweated and screwed on, they are about bombproof. I've used receiver sights for a couple. I like the older steel Lyman No 57's. I've bought them at gun shows for around $20-$35. They work on the Mausers and Springfields quite well, and could be adapted to others if you can't find the exact one needed. On one Ruger 77 in 338, I sighted it in with the irons, then inletted under the buttplate for the sight slide, so it was always with the gun. With even my swiss army knife I could take off the butt pad and get the sight out. It has a stop to allow it to be sighted in and removed, then installed again. Barrel sights are nice since they are always ready to go, but not as precise as the receiver peeps. For summer carry use the irons are nice. The Ruger stocks seem to work fairly well with either scope or irons.

This is the Whitworth 375 with Lyman no 57 peep. Unfortunately, the gunsmith didnt listen when I told him exactly what type ramp I wanted, and he installed a Remington ramp. I don't think they look as nice as the Williams. Pretty handy to tote around with irons. It carries nicely in the hand at the balance point.

Here's a pic of the shorty ramp setup on a 1903 Springfield sporter. It has a sourdough blade.

Jeremy, I'd consider using a ramp front on your gun, a dovetail would likely set the sight plane a bit too low for your stock.

Often, gunsmiths have a box of sights and parts you can dug through and buy stuff cheap. Same for gun shows. The Remingtons had steel sights, and can be installed on other guns. I have had a Remington rear break once though. They aren't real tough. They have a very small screw holding the blade on and adjusts for windage I caught one on a case pulling the gun out and broke the screw and sight off. I bought a whole nother complete sight to get the screw. I think I paid $5 for the complete sight assy.

Edit: I agree that most guns scoped with decent glass probably don't "need" irons, but I like them for backup. Irons also are good as summer carry sights, where the extra bulk of glass may be more of a nuisance. I like good glass, but it isn't always needed. Africa or Alaska aren't the only places you may have a great desire to shoot fast and close.

I am always fooling around with my rifles. Good quality glass is practically night vision compared to any irons. I can see deer or fence posts in my yard with a scope, and call the shot, when I can't even see the targets or iron sights in the darkness. Good glass is nice to have, but again, not always needed.

Streetstar · Post by **Streetstar** » Mon May 31, 2010 9:19 pm

Maybe its a cost saving measure, IDK, but an optic just works better for a lot of real world scenarios. The only time i questioned optics was when i had a game animal running towards me in a panic and i had the variable scope on 9x ---- that was once in a lot of years.

As well, short range situations where the animal can either maul or stomp you generally involve open sights (elephants, water buffalo, hippo, lion, etc , etc )

Ask JMiller-- he goofed up a perfectly good medium range bolt rifle somebody gave him when he decided to jack with it because he mistakenly thought the lack of iron sights "ruined it" (kind of funny)

In the real world i have had 2 scopes fail -- one was a very nice fixed power 6x Bushnell i had on a .22, the other was a $50 Simmons i had on a .300 Weatherby Mag (talk about asking for it)

The only way to really use irons on a scope mounted rifle would have to be with a quick release type mount maybe, because the see-thru mounts put the scope way too high for comfortable use.

I also have had a rear sight kaboom on a Winchester model 94 similar to what another poster wrote about --- i dropped the rifle (i dont recommend the practice) and the rear sight broke into 3 pieces --- i would have loved to have a scope back me up that day.

Besides, open sights just add unnecessary garbage to some rifles. My .30 Lazzeroni Warbird for instance, would not be appropriate in either function or appearance with a set of irons , And i dare say, nor would any number of other rifles chambered in anything from .308 on up

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon May 31, 2010 9:28 pm

Streetstar wrote:Maybe its a cost saving measure, IDK, but an optic just works better for a lot of real world scenarios. The only time i questioned optics was when i had a game animal running towards me in a panic and i had the variable scope on 9x ---- that was once in a lot of years.

As well, short range situations where the animal can either maul or stomp you generally involve open sights (elephants, water buffalo, hippo, lion, etc , etc )

Ask JMiller-- he goofed up a perfectly good medium range bolt rifle somebody gave him when he decided to jack with it because he mistakenly thought the lack of iron sights "ruined it" (kind of funny)

In the real world i have had 2 scopes fail -- one was a very nice fixed power 6x Bushnell i had on a .22, the other was a $50 Simmons i had on a .300 Weatherby Mag (talk about asking for it)

The only way to really use irons on a scope mounted rifle would have to be with a quick release type mount maybe, because the see-thru mounts put the scope way too high for comfortable use.

I also have had a rear sight kaboom on a Winchester model 94 similar to what another poster wrote about --- i dropped the rifle (i dont recommend the practice) and the rear sight broke into 3 pieces --- i would have loved to have a scope back me up that day.

Besides, open sights just add unnecessary garbage to some rifles. My .30 Lazzeroni Warbird for instance, would not be appropriate in either function or appearance with a set of irons , And i dare say, nor would any number of other rifles chambered in anything from .308 on up

Streetstar,

I'm glad you think my misfortune is funny. So far I've failed to see the humor in having gunsmiths ruin a rifle.
I've yet to shoot it, even though it has a scope on it. And it will probably rust away before I ever shoot it.
Rifles need iron sights, they are incomplete without them.
I'm still not laughing, maybe you can laugh enough for both of us.
Don't bring me into the anti-iron sight group, I'm NOT on your side in this matter.

Joe

BenT · Post by **BenT** » Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 pm

Can't go wrong with a BLR 308 . But if money is an issue and you want a bolt action, get a 30-06 . Used 06's can be had for under $300 on the used rack at a gunshop, pawnshop or at a gunshow. I buy very few new guns.

I use iron sights the majority of the time. Most shots during deer season are under 100 yards. Shooting iron sights is becoming a skill most people don't have. It's too easy to mount a scope for most people.

JReed · Post by **JReed** » Mon May 31, 2010 10:06 pm

Malamute wrote: Will try to get a pic of the shorty ramp setup.

Jeremy, I'd consider using a ramp front on your gun, a dovetail would likely set the sight plane a bit too low for your stock.

Malamute
I would love to see the shorty ramp. After some research I have decided that the ramp would get me what I want. Thanks for your input.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Mon May 31, 2010 10:10 pm

Pics up in my earlier post.

Streetstar · Post by **Streetstar** » Mon May 31, 2010 10:19 pm

J Miller wrote:[
Streetstar,

I'm glad you think my misfortune is funny. So far I've failed to see the humor in having gunsmiths ruin a rifle.
I've yet to shoot it, even though it has a scope on it. And it will probably rust away before I ever shoot it.
Rifles need iron sights, they are incomplete without them.
I'm still not laughing, maybe you can laugh enough for both of us.
Don't bring me into the anti-iron sight group, I'm NOT on your side in this matter.

Joe

Joe

lets not get anything started now

, sometimes ultimate responsibility for life's mistakes lies with us, not with the mechanics we choose to carry out our tasks. Even down to as small a matter as having a gunsmith install "sights" on a rifle that was never really designed (designed is not the right word, intended is the right word i think ) to carry them. The 'smith may not have done ideal work, but it was you who initially decided to take a modern rifle to a "smith" to mount an unnecessary set of irons on it. You agreed to pay the man to do this . Can you hit anything reliably at the limits of a .30-'06's range with barrel mounted irons? -

-- I cant either

I laugh because you are such a curmudgeon , and i hunt and shoot with people who are older than you are who love a nice smooth 5 lug Weatherby Mark 5 action -(or something equivalent) with a decent quality scope from LEupold or something even better from Zeiss, Schmidt & Bender or Swarovski and recognize that using opens is a step backwards in many many situations.
These are people who recognize that optics give a performance advantage for the situations they hunt in, or they just like them because they are old enough to remember hunting with opens and some of the limitations that has too, and they realize that shooting with irons is taking a B-I-G step backwards unless they are going to Africa and the shots are all guaranteed to be within 50-75 yards (with animals that can kill you)

If you spent a little bit of range time with a nice set of optics, you would "get it", rather than just assuming a rifle is trash if its only equipped for optics.
I have seen many action photos of our boys overseas with ACogs mounted so low the irons were useless as well--- alot of those fellas have faith in their "carrying handles" it seems .
On the flip side, i also think that a shooter should learn with irons before using an optic, but that doesn't mean they are a better system. We live in a world with a "survival of the fittest" mindset. The things that are better, faster, easier, and more productive eventually get used the most-- this is the case in most walks of life. When it comes to a levergun oriented forum population, this is a bit skewed because all of us appreciate the old way of doing things to an extent, and that is very cool, but it is foolish to discount new ideas because they conflict with what our grandfather did

If i say things you dont agree with, please rest assured that i am not saying (writing) them with any contempt or malice, just good natured observation

Rant over ... carry on

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Mon May 31, 2010 11:02 pm

Well I seen the same point made for scopes a couple times that they 'most likely won't fail'. I am not really worried about a scope failing, I just don't want one. Besides the fact that the ones that work well and are very trustworthy tend to cost as much or more than the rifle itself, rifles just handle different with a scope and you handle them differently as well; always being conscious not to bang the scope on anything. I just plain ol' like the simple things and iron sights are simple, cheap and very effective.

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Mon May 31, 2010 11:21 pm

Well, I did a lot of searching and found something that may work:

Savage 11F Hunter

The funny thing is they are on all the different gun sites for sell but are not listed on Savage's site.

Streetstar · Post by **Streetstar** » Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:57 am

Andrew wrote:Well, I did a lot of searching and found something that may work:

Savage 11F Hunter

The funny thing is they are on all the different gun sites for sell but are not listed on Savage's site.

I saw a handful of Model 700 Remingtons at (of all places) Wal MArt that looked a lot like that Savage too. I dont know if they were BDL's or ADL's, and i'm not familiar enough with Big Green to know the difference, but they were in the $350 - 400 price range and definitely has irons. Most were .243, but i'm sure they could get any caliber the rifle was available in

L_Kilkenny · Post by **L_Kilkenny** » Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:37 am

Andrew wrote:Well I seen the same point made for scopes a couple times that they 'most likely won't fail'. I am not really worried about a scope failing, I just don't want one. Besides the fact that the ones that work well and are very trustworthy tend to cost as much or more than the rifle itself, rifles just handle different with a scope and you handle them differently as well; always being conscious not to bang the scope on anything. I just plain ol' like the simple things and iron sights are simple, cheap and very effective.

Well again I'm gonna be the odd man out here and say that the only rifles that look right with open sights are lever guns. IME, scopes are much better in ALL hunting applications and to tell the truth, more durable. I've knocked one scope off of zero after a drop down a hill onto ice (me and the gun) but I've busted at least 5 sets of open sights. I'll be the first to admit that some of my guns have seen some hard use. Most of them .22's while chasing coonhounds in the dark. But in all of those years of bumbling and stumbling around in the dark I've never so much as busted or had a scope fail. Now theirs a good bet that the open sights on a quality centerfire will be much better than those on my rimfires but then again, the scope for a centerfire will be better than the scopes I use on my .22's too.

On another note you mention wanting more accuracy than the M44. Sure you'll get it with a better rifle but you'll never realize anything close to it's potential with irons. I may get bashed here but 100-125 yard max in good light is gonna be about the limit to guarantee a clean hit.

LK

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:59 am

LK,

I DO "get it". More than you apparently. I'm just like Andrew: I DON'T WANT A SCOPED RIFLE! You can be odd man out if you want, that's fine. But making fun of someone with a ruined rifle because they wanted it a specific way and it was messed up by gunsmiths is low down and mean.
You go ahead and shoot your scoped rifles and enjoy them. But please respect those of us who don't like scoped rifles. It's OUR choice, NOT yours.

Andrew,
Looks like a good choice.

Joe

MistWolf · Post by **MistWolf** » Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:58 pm

You could always go for an Ishapore Enfield in 7.62x51

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:07 pm

MistWolf wrote:You could always go for an Ishapore Enfield in 7.62x51

If your responding to my post, I have one already. If you weren't responding to my post, I still have one already.

Joe

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:22 pm

There are Iron Sights, and there are "Iron Sights".

I just removed the latter in favor of the former.

Anybody seen one of these... things before?

What is it?

I replaced it with a proper Lyman 57SB. (Thanks bsaride!)

Now I've just got to clean the VARNISH out of the rifle's guts left from when some previous owner decided to refinish the stock while it was ON THE ACTION!

Anybody got ideas on how to get the stocks back into reasonable shape? The metal I can clean, but what do I do about the wood?

piller · Post by **piller** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:39 am

I grew up with iron sights, and will purchase a rifle with them, and have never yet purchased a rifle without them. I have scoped my .30-06, and a 10/22. Scopes should remain a choice, and I will never purchase a rifle without iron sights just due to personal choice. Scopes have their place, and I can use one well enough, but I do not trust them as implicitly as some folks do. I expect mechanical things to fail, and therefore the simpler it is to make and/or fix, the less likely it is to let me down when I need it most.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:18 am

all my factory open sights have come off - at my age I need something better.

I prefer tang peeps and now all my guns have them. I also have put Weaver rails on my Marlins because the tang sights will see over them, and I can attach or remove a scope in a couple of seconds.

I wouldn't hesitate to purchase a rifle without iron sights, as you can always mount some sort of iron sight in the scope holes. You can even get one that fits on the Weaver rails. Whatever sight you get free with the rifle isn't likely to be what you want anyway.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:27 am

A lot of used Remington 700's you see at shows and pawn shops have iron. The older ones are drilled on the side of the receiver for a peep. If you keep scratching around you are bound to find one.

My daughter has a Remington Youth Model 7 in 7-08 and it came with iron. A lot of people take the iron of the Remingtons so if you find one that is drilled already and lacks the sights you can usually find a set of factory sights someone doesn't want anymore. It is true the factory rear sights have a bad rep for being fragile.

I never used anything but iron until I got glasses in my 30's. I can still shoot a semi buckhorn on a sunny day, but in the shady woods the front sight just disappears into the rear notch when I align the sights. I can still use a peep though.

It is hard to find a gunsmith anymore who can drill a hole top dead center and keep a series of holes in a straight line. They are out there though.

MistWolf · Post by **MistWolf** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:09 pm

J Miller wrote:
MistWolf wrote:You could always go for an Ishapore Enfield in 7.62x51
If your responding to my post, I have one already. If you weren't responding to my post, I still have one already.

Joe

Actually, I was responding to Andrew, the original poster. I think an 03-A3 would be better, but he was looking for a 308

Timothy · Post by **Timothy** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:12 am

Not that I can hit anything with either, but I like irons because you can get your thumb over the reciever. I can walk 5 miles without switching hands carrying a win94 but with a scoped 700 I'm switching every 50 yards.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:29 am

Timothy wrote:Not that I can hit anything with either, but I like irons because you can get your thumb over the reciever. I can walk 5 miles without switching hands carrying a win94 but with a scoped 700 I'm switching every 50 yards.

I like being able to get my hand around a rifle also. It seems more secure and less tiring. I tend to carry bolt guns upside down (scope down). That way I can get most of my fingers around the gun under the scope, and it feels better carrying it.

brno602 · Post by **brno602** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:39 pm

pokey wrote:
Andrew wrote:
Maybe I should just get a BLR and be done with it.

or a savage 99.

yup,yup,yup.

What's a 99? just the most perfect way ahead of it's time lever? Okay will keep my mouth shut now.

.300 savage 99 my favorite lever but it is closer to my beloved bolt guns. I just need to get my paws on a .358.

brno602 · Post by **brno602** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:42 pm

Old Ironsights wrote:There are Iron Sights, and there are "Iron Sights".

I just removed the latter in favor of the former.

Anybody seen one of these... things before?

What is it?

I replaced it with a proper Lyman 57SB. (Thanks bsaride!)

Now I've just got to clean the VARNISH out of the rifle's guts left from when some previous owner decided to refinish the stock while it was ON THE ACTION!

Anybody got ideas on how to get the stocks back into reasonable shape? The metal I can clean, but what do I do about the wood?

What are you doing posting gun Por*??

Timothy · Post by **Timothy** » Sat Jun 12, 2010 9:38 pm

Malamute, I know that trick too and it works well doesnt it. I'll bet you also thought about putting higher rings for a better grip like I have.