The rear iron sight, preference?

[getitdone1]

I like a rear sight to be flat across the top. Too,if the front sight will allow, I like the rear sight low. No buckhorn or semi-buckhorn for me.

I acquired this taste in rear sight from doing a lot of shooting with several Marlin model 39s. This rear sight is really higher than I like but, as I say, you gotta be high enough to match-up with the front sight.

I know a lot of you much prefer a peep sight for your rear sight.

One thing comes to mind when it comes to the rear sight for a "dangerous game gun" and that is you never see one with a peep sight. A shallow "v" is supposed to be the prefered rear sight for this use.

For close-up encounters with dangerous game I know for sure I'd rather have open sights than a 1-3X scope which is often used.

Different strokes for different folks and I know some of you prefer the buckhorn rear sights. Lots of people did years ago.

Don

[MrMurphy]

I hunted the most dangerous game with iron sights........ aperature, M16 type.

Then we upgraded to Aimpoints Comp M2's, which are even faster. Luckily we never 'caught' any, but we sure did look hard in a lot of cases.


I agree on express sights, but they're also only useful for very short distances.

[JReed]

I am with MrMurphy if I could put M16A2 sights on all of my rifles I would. I have used a wide variety of iron sights and those are my favorite.

[Griff]

My favorite rear sight:


I also like the folding ladder on my Henry:


And feel the tang peep is the most accurate of the "irons":


Although I certainly understand other preferences... 'sides, too many folks all wanting the same thing sure drives up prices!

[Dirty Bob]

Anyone try the Skinner Sight peep that mounts in the dovetail on the barrel? Looks like a very nice way to add a peep to a '94 without making any permanent changes to the gun.

http://www.skinnersights.com/barrel_mount_6.html

BTW, Griff, nice pics, and general agreement on the folding tang sights. I like 'em a lot, but the prices have gone up!

Thanks,
Dirty Bob

[Malamute]

I prefer receiver peeps. I see no problem with them for fast shooting, so long as you arent trying to use too large a disc and too small an aperture. No disc works fine, as many discovered a couple generations ago or more. I used to hit running rabbits regularly with them. I don't always try to look thru them, I look over them in a flash sight picture more like a shotgun sight image. I've hit things thrown in the air with them also. The M-16/M-1 Garand type sight is what Cooper had in mind when he coined the term "ghost ring". A thin rim and large hole. It doesnt have to be a particular maker to be a "real" ghost ring, its a concept, and about any receiver peep without any disc at all qualifies. I have to chuckle when I see comments about guys taking their receiver peeps off to install a "ghost ring" sight as they perceived them to be better. They already had one!

I've heard of several guys that use receiver peeps for dangerous game, if you consider Alaskan bears dangerous.

I'm not a fan of buckhorns either. Used to be, but not after using them over time. Not really a fan of barrel sights in any event, but the flat topped ones seem faster and easier to use for me.

I'm firmly in the not caring for tang sights camp. OK for deliberate shooting, but I find them rather inconvenient for general use and handling.

[gak]

I'm with Griff on the semi buck and ladder (though I don't have the latter, I have used. My Browning 1886 SRC was swapped before I got it; I'd like to put it back to its original ladder). I LOVE the peep--ramp adjustable type--on my M1 Carbine, but wouldn't suggest it or the gun on a charging bull elephant

[Old Savage]

Open, not full buckhorn, don't like tang sights.

[FWiedner]

I prefer a receiver mounted ghost-ring type set up, e.g. M16 A2, XS, or Skinner type aperture.

Just faster for me to use, sight picture seems more natural.

[madman4570]

Shooting target or game in decent lit (more open type) field conditions----------M16 A2 type
Shooting game in actual conditions of the deep woods(within 100yds) where I hunt-----------Ithaca Deerslayer raybar rifle sight type

[AJMD429]

If I had to go after toothed/fanged game and didn't need precision-adjustable sights, I think I'd use one of these Marbles 'Bullseye' sights:





Compared to the regular 'notch' rear sight (I shaded in what one would look like) you see far more of the target/terrain. A very FAST sight, but not all that adjustable. Very durable, too - I think they must be made of some super-duper spring steel, as they are the kind of thing it takes a carbide bit to drill, and major force in a vice to bend.

[Mike D.]

For hunting purposes I much prefer the receiver sight with the aperture removed. Tang mounted sights do not work well enough for hunting use, as "target" acquisition is too slow for fast shooting, not to mention the interference with gripping the wrist of the stock. OK for slow and deliberate target shooting, not for hunting.

[getitdone1]

Outstanding pictures, Griff.

I didn't think of it at the time but my favorite rear iron sight is the one on my Browning 1886 SRC. Ladder type. Low and flat across the top.

I also like the fact that when I mount this gun the sights "are right there."

I'd like to try the settings on the ladder for distant shots. How's that work for some of you?

Don

[Rimfire McNutjob]

I know what you mean about a flat rear sight. I have really taken to the flat leaf of the Lyman No.6 on my Marlin 1897.

[InTheWoods]

For my old eyes, I will take a good receiver sight any time. I often take the aperture out in poor light or if I expect quick shots at moving game. I don't think I would like the barrel mounted peeps because I believe an peep should be as close to the eye as possible. If tang sights didn't get in my way when hunting, I would use them. Buckhorns are my least favorite type of sight as I think they block out too much of the target area. Barrel mounted notch sights should have flat tops, just like good handgun sights.

[AJMD429]

Tang mounted sights do not work well enough for hunting use, as "target" acquisition is too slow for fast shooting, not to mention the interference with gripping the wrist of the stock. OK for slow and deliberate target shooting, not for hunting.

Oh-oh... Now the news media will start calling Tang Sights "Sniper Sights" that are clearly not for hunting...

[L_Kilkenny]

I tried finding a rear sight I liked includeing the sight the AJMD has posted for my 94ae and just couldn't get it done. So if you really really can't live with a receiver sight (or a scope ) you might try the fold down rear sights like those on the Ruger 10/22 and the BL22.

LK

[.45colt]

Late in the winter here the local whitetails are starving and will come up close to the house to dig for acorns. they retreat to a thicket in the Neighbours yard about 60 yards from our porch.
I have several times taken a bunch of different rifles out to test the sights.(not shooting) just as I found out as a Kid,for Me nothing beats a reciver sight.

[getitdone1]

AJMD429,

Nice pictures. Like to try that sight. Sure lets you see everything.

But! You canted that rifle!

Seriously. How much does canting effect accuracy? I've read it does but I've never experimented with it.

Don

[J Miller]

My rear sight of preference is a receiver mounted peep sight. Military sights such as those found on my No4 Mk1, the M1 Garand and others are exceptional.
For my lever guns, those that are drilled and tapped wear either Lyman or Williams side mount sight. Those that are not D&T'd will be eventually and will have those sights mounted.
When so equipped I install a post type front sight. I find this set up to be the best combination for me.

As far as barrel sights go I can live with most of them, but I don't do as well as I do with the peep sights. Most come paired up with front sights fitted with far too large a bead so I switch them out for the smallest bead I can get.

Joe

[bdhold]

The reason I like a peep sight is the depth-of-focus.
I can see it..I can see the target..

I really like a variable aperture, (either Hadley cup or Merit) since I can adjust it to ambient light conditions and balance that against depth of focus and target image.


(photo is cockeyed a little bit, but you can see my globe level in the bottom of the sight image)
Then, of course, there is the long sight radius, which improves accuracy.



On my low-wall, I replaced the buckhorns with a Marble's folding sight, and calibrated it against the Creedmor - sorry I don't have a photo of it - but you couldn't ask for a lower-profile sight.
(borrowed this from Midway)

I had to raise the elevation adjustment up above the base of the sight, so the white diamond and small aperture cup stick up above it. It's very visible and you couldn't ask for a cleaner field.

[AJMD429]

AJMD429,
Nice pictures. Like to try that sight. Sure lets you see everything.
But! You canted that rifle!
Seriously. How much does canting effect accuracy? I've read it does but I've never experimented with it.
Don

The RCBS LoadData software I use lets you enter a figure for right or left canting, and until you're out 500 yards or more, and the cant is 5-10 degrees, I don't recall it having much of an effect. Haven't tried it recently on the software, and haven't done it (intentionally, at least) at the range. Maybe others can speak to this.

The Marbles Bullseye sights are available from Marbles Sight Co, from our own NKJ's web-store, from MidwayUSA, and Brownell's. There are 'fixed' ones, and two adjustable ones - with the higher-number one having an unusually long horizontal spring, and thus lots of elevation possible.

I'd like to 'marry' a Marble's aperture with a Williams adjustable base. I did double-side-tape my 'fixed' one to the top of a Marlin at the front two scope-screw holes, where I usually mount my Williams FP's, and the sight picture is pretty much the same as when mounted on the barrel.

BTW, the sight-picture really does look just like the photo...



The outside ring is more visible, and REALLY fast for if something is coming at you quickly, but your eye automatically centers into the inner ring, which is much 'fuzzier', but serves to fine-tune your aim if you have the luxury of that extra second to aim more precisely.

[Ysabel Kid]

Like Griff, I like the semi-buckhorn the best.

[MrMurphy]

Didn't have issues with M4/M16 irons in deep German woods, don't think they'd do any worse in your case. And an Aimpoint is even faster.

[geobru]

I like semi buckhorns for target shooting, but after sighting on a small buck at 10 yards and not being able to tell where I was holding on his body due to the ears of the sight covering up too much area, I abandoned that sight for hunting and went with a tang sight. For me, a tang sight is quicker than a receiver peep sight because when the gun is shouldered, I am automatically looking through the peep and all I have to do is put the top of the blade where i want to hit and squeeze off the shot. The receiver sights require a bit more time to line up for me, and I don't mind the tang getting in the way when shooting.

[M. M. Wright]

I started using the Marbles tang sight for SASS and liked so much that I started putting them on all my lever guns. No disc, just sight through the threads.
As for getting in the way, they prevent wrapping the thumb around the wrist of the stock which is how you should shoot, especially levers. Quick follow-up with the lever is faster without wrapping the thumb around the stock.
My only problem now is remembering to stand the sight up at the loading bench and not have to do it on the clock.

[RIHMFIRE]

[quote="Griff"]My favorite rear sight:


me too!

[Sarge]

I like a rear sight to be flat across the top. Too,if the front sight will allow, I like the rear sight low. No buckhorn or semi-buckhorn for me.
....
Don

Agreed. I've tried about everything and find nothing I like better than the flat-top factory rear on my old pre-64 Model 94. A fine ivory bead makes it ideal for the dark ol' woods.

[piller]

I prefer a peep or ghost ring rear sight. Much as I hated everything else about the M16A1, the rear sight with 2 different size apertures which did not change your point of impact, was a great idea. Wide aperture for everything, quick to obtain target, and a small peep opening if you had a longer shot which needed more precise aiming. I do not feel that my Skinner sight on my Guide Gun is limiting in any way.

[COSteve]

Tang mounted sights do not work well enough for hunting use, as "target" acquisition is too slow for fast shooting, not to mention the interference with gripping the wrist of the stock. OK for slow and deliberate target shooting, not for hunting.

While I respect Mike's perspective and vast knowledge, he is ignoring the main reason I believe that tang sights were and still are so popular; that many of us with 'less than perfect' eyesight really need the benefit of the increased Depth of Field (DoF) the tang's small, close aperture produces to see both the target and the front sight clearly enough to be able to shoot consistently. Yes, one has to learn to lay the shooting thumb along the side of the stock rather than over the top but if we can't see the sights and game then no matter what we have, we won't make the shot. I consider the tang sight a necessity for shooting at any distance because I need the DoF to have any chance of making a good shot. Add to that the dramatic increase in sight radius the tang affords, even over the receiver sight, (a 24" Rossi's std sight radius is 20" while the tang sight gives it 30") and the tang sight is a natural for hunting.

If your eyes are sharp enough, then using the slightly larger .055" aperture or .105" hunting aperture in the tang still gives some boost to one's DoF, still provides the longer sight radius, and increases both the speed and field of view over the .032" target sight. Further, as mentioned previously, the tang sight is the fastest of the three for many of us as shouldering and dropping into the cheek weld sets the sights up ready to go much faster because your head drops into position naturally after your muscles learn the 'feel' of it. I have an M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and AR-15 and agree that as a combat rifle sight, the receiver peep sight is excellent, however, the combat rifle is designed for a different purpose than a hunting rifle. Just look at the difference between an ordinary soldier's weapon and a sniper's. I believe good hunting is about setting up the stalk to the game so that a well aimed, humane shot is the goal rather than jumping at a snap shot that can result in a long, sometimes unsuccessful track of a wounded animal.

Finally, I have leverguns with all three sights and for me, the tang is clearly superior from 50 yds on out to the maximum range I shoot them to (300 yds). My practice style is to set many small targets at random ranges (usually 4" clay pigeons) rather than setting up on a single paper target at a set range. That way, I'm forced to estimate the range and angle quickly for each shot just as I would out in the field hunting. Even though I like to shoot my Rossi carbine as well as my receiver sighted Henry 22lr under the same conditions, my tang sighted Rossi rifle wins hands down with the fastest hits (not just the fastest shots) every time.

[Lastmohecken]

I have struggled with the sight question, all of my life, and to this day, I am not entirely set on any one kind, as I have had both good and bad, and sometimes great sight combinations on both open, and peep, and scope.

As far as I am concerned a low powered scope wins out on moving or running game, past 50yds, or shots in the dark timber, past 50yds. And a higher powered scope wins out on most any shot over a hundred yards, and beyond.

However, I use a lot of iron sighted guns, but the relationship between front and rear sights is so important. Get it right and it's fantastic, get it wrong and you just created a slow to use, hard to shoot, hard to hit with combination.

As far as I am concerned about the best open iron factory combination, ever sold was on the standard 20 inch barreled pre-64 Winchester model 94, but the post 64's had a lot cheaper and sorry set of sights.

I also like a lot of the older flat tops sights, if paired up right with the front. I have a custom Winchester model 71 in 450 Alaskan that was build in the fiftys, that has possible the best flat top sight combination I have every owned.

I like receiver sights and will often go to that combo, if the factory sights on a gun, do not pan out, but it's a finikey thing with me, and sometimes elusive to arrive at the right combination even when going to receiver sights, and Barrel length comes into play.

And also, I have found that a really top of the line set of shallow V sights, can also be accurate at the longer ranges, but most people don't believe it because they have never used a find set of shallow V's that were calibrated correctly. And the right combination of shallow V is faster at close range then a ghost ring IMHO, but maybe not for the unskilled open iron shooter.

[Old Ironsights]

I am with MrMurphy if I could put M16A2 sights on all of my rifles I would. I have used a wide variety of iron sights and those are my favorite.

+3

Peep & Post for me...