Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Back up iron sights ?

I just saw the movie called �The Edge� with Anthony Hopkins and Alec Baldwin. It was a fun movie to watch. It did get me to thinking though. My current rifle has no open sights on it, just a scope. I wonder how a scope would do if it were dropped and I was way the hell out in the wilderness. Many times in the movie I could see where a scope would be smashed to pieces. One slip on a rock and the scope is broken. My questions are these. Do any of you think a rifle should have iron sights on it for back up when going on a wilderness hunt ? I have noticed that most manufactures do not place iron sights on their Rifles anymore. A few models have them but most don�t. It would be interesting to know if folks that do have iron sights ever sight them in before adding a scope. To me, it seems like cheep insurance to have iron sights and a way to take the scope off out in the field.

30-30 Man

Hey 30
Ya why would you need a scope?? most people post here that I have noticed is into their latest rifles and loupie scopes and fast calibers. Ken Howell posted a story about the adobie wall shot ( go read it ) well it was a 45 90 I believe at about a 3/4 mile marker. open sights of course. I shoot alot with open sights and am not into the beloved .5 moa shots on paper. I put up a paper plate and aim for the middle at 100 yds and do real well even off hand. I have out shot the scope folks off hand with open sights. If anyone has hunted coyotes very long they will use open sights. Remember if you can hit the pieplate you can hit the coyote. when he takes off running the scope is the hard one to pic him up on let alone keep the x hairs on him. I use an sks with open sights and it works out to 300 yds. Deer is even easier. I do use a scope for chuck hunting 3-9 and 8-14 for the long shots but remember those critters like to pose for you and their heads are alot smaller. Well these are things to ponder and I am here to learn. Any more thoughts??

Bearbeater

The line of sight through a scope is generally a good bit higher than the line of sight over open sights, so a stock comb that's the right height for one is too high or too low for the other.

Considering the costs of (a) good open sights and (b) getting 'em correctly mounted on the barrel, a better option may be carrying an extra scope, in an extra pair of rings, already zeroed andthen removed, well padded, and safely packed in your field luggage.

Your back-up scope doesn't have to be as fancy, as powerful, or as expensive as your primary scope. Shop for your back-up scope at gun shows, for example. Many good emergency back-ups are available there at good prices. Gun shops sometimes let good used scopes go cheap, too. I've put good used scopes in extra rings for fewer bucks than good open sights would've cost.

The Talbot QD mount (2210 E Grand Blanc Rd; Grand Blanc, MI 48439; 810-695-2497) on my .220 is set-up for four scopes for zeros at four different ranges. (It always returns the scope to zero, no matter how many times the scope may be removed and replaced � and once you get the hang of it, you can switch scopes in just a few seconds (much faster than with any other mount that I've ever used). The Talbot is a bit pricy but well worth every dime.

.

I'm gonna agree with Ken on this... the expense of setting up backup irons should be taken into consideration. Really, the idea of backup iron's is a mental excercise of the "worst case scenario" type... sorta like the "best backup for grizzly" excercise. In reality, having a zeroed scope as a backup makes more sense. Me, I have both! I always wanted a 30-06 setup with backup iron's so last year did it. I'm pleased with the result, but the expense is high... with parts and smithing the iron's are pushing $175 as well as adding weight. Still, to me, a rifle of this genre just looks better with iron's... needed? No... but I like em:

Does anyone have a link to a picture of the Talbot QD mounts? Google images can find a couple of hits, but the drawing link is broken.

This subject got a bit more real this week now that I have a new action available that I intend to convert to .376 Steyr. I often go for the "slick barrel" configuration (ie. no iron sights), and use more than one scope. My default has been the Talleys, but I am willing to use other things with promise.

thanks...jim

I will not own a serious big game rifle without both a spare scope in q.d. rings, pre-sighted of course AND good irons also sighted. When backpacking, every ounce counts, I have a system on my rifles that utilizes Leupy Q.D. mounts and a receiver sight with sourdough front post.

I have had scopes go south on me when hunting and the peep sight works for up to about 200 yds. I can shoot this rig better than express sights, so, that is my choice. In less rugged country than B.C., I would just go with a spare scope, but, here the snow, rain and brutal terrain make the irons worth both their cost and weight, IMO.

Brad
That is a nice rugged looking rifle for the wilderness. By that I mean toughness and ready for action in any situation. That is the kind of rifle I would want if I was in the same situation as was in the movie � The Edge.� The Remington I am getting has the factory iron sights on it but I don�t know anything about how good they are. Maybe someone who has a Remington Model Seven or BDL could answer this. I would sight mine in at 100 yards. Hell, what range should a person sight in for on their backup irons ?

30-30 Man

Rem sight's aren't too shabby. They're actually "hollow" and shave a lot of weight over the NECG rear and Ashley front on my rifle. The Rem's are also quite sturdy. Some folks with beefy cheeks complain about them being a bit too low but I've not experienced that problem with them. I zero my iron's an inch high at 100... dead on's fine too.

A lot of it depends on how much you practice with and actually USE irons sights while hunting. If you haven't used them much at all, you're better off with a backup scope.

If you do use iron sights (whether open or aperture rear) enough to be confident with them, then backup irons save some hassle and weight. Some rifles still come with good irons installed, other must be retrofitted, which adds to the expense.

If you really shoot and hunt with good irons, it astonishes scope-users how much can be done with them. The useful range depends to a certain extent on the cartridge. A .270 Win. or .300 magnum shoots just as flat with irons as it does with a scope. I have used a peep-sighted .270 at over 300 yards with no hassle. A slower cartridge will of course be harder to hit with at longer range, but then that's also true with a scoped rifle chambered for a slower round.

You do lose some low-light advantage with irons, of course, but that is less advantage in many types of hunting than most modern hunters are willing to believe.

MD

The factory Remington and Winchester sights each seem to share the same production problem . . . sometimes (two for two in my case) they aren't on as tightly as they should be. They each have a screw under the dovetail on the front sight and the Remington has a screw hidden under the elevation bar on the rear. So, before you sight them in, make sure they are tight.

Mule Deer is spot on with the practice advice. If you haven't shot open sights, as opposed to aperture (peep) sights in a while, there's some practice involved before you develop the "faith" that you can hit with them.

I have 3 guns set up with iron sights (from factory) and scopes mounted on Weaver Pivot Mounts. I did it first with my son's and my 10/22s for those 5 to 15 foot shots at squirrel and rabbit heads. If the critter is too close, it is very difficult to a make a quick and good shot with a scope. In a fraction of a second you can pivot the scope out of the way and use iron. Returning to zero when snapped back is not an issue. I have also set up a Rem 788 in 6mm and a Ruger tang style 77 in 270 the same way. Iron can be used for close or brush situations and as a back up (if needed) for a failed scope.
I have learned to like this set up and it gives me some comfort in certain situations where having only one or the other could limit your ability for a clean harvest.

BearBeater, the Adobe Walls shot was with a 50-90 Sharps and was made by Billy Dixon. The surveyed range was 1538 yds. A mile is 1760 yds. That made it close to 7/8 mile. As far as how far should a rifle with irons be sighted for?? You can sight a 30-06 180 for 270 yds and have a vital area hit out to approx. 310 yds. How good the rifleman is remains the answer to that one. Those of us who qualified in the service with an M1 or an M14 had to hit a man size silouette out to 500 yds. If you made expert back then it meant you hit them. A premium hunting rifle and premium ammo should do a lot better than a rack M1 or M14 and service ball. Have a bit of confidence in yourself.

Darn it John! What are you doing spouting practical, useful advice?

This is a fantasy website. If we wanted reality we'd watch survivor . . . . . . <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Actually backup irons are a good idea, I am looking at getting a set of William Firesights for that purpose. My intention is to rig my 10/22 with a similar set, and practice a LOT with the 10/22 and less with the rifle.

BMT

Hey Evil
I have all the confidance in the world I am just conserned about you?? Thank you for the info about the adobie shot and that was pre scope. How can they do that?? must have practiced a bit??
Bearbeater

On my only trip to Africa in 88, I carefully shaped the open sight on the Sako Safari .375 to a shallow V, with a vertical line of white paint, and filed it dead on at 100. Also had an extra 1.5-5x Leupold in Sako mounts which are easily detachable. The Sako does not have controlled round feed but luckily I had not in those early days read all the gloom and doom about needing it or I would have been scared s_____less.

Surely seem to be a lot of folks with doubled up scopes and mounts out there. Personally I don't own a rifle without iron sights and most have some form of aperture rear and a sourdough variant foresight. With weapons I travel with over long distances and especially by air, I do believe in having a second pre-zeroed scope in mounts.

That being said, over the years, discounting new scopes that had problems discovered on the first firing and cheap scopes which I don't even consider, I do believe I've seen more iron sights knocked out of whack, lost beads, or whatever than defective scopes. I still wouldn't be without irons on a rifle, if for no other reason than a weapon just doesn't look right with a naked barrel to me and I really prefer to shoot and hunt with them except for first and last light and thick brush and shadows-- which unfortunately takes into account most of my shots in the woods. Still hunt with firearms with only iron sights anyway.

Dunno what it says about me that I prefer what I've seen the most problems with, but there it 'tis. I've actually, knocking on wood, never had a problem with a quality scope even on the big bores once it was mounted and had proven to be a good one from the factory.

I own a 3 rifles without iron sights, because that is how they come now. My hard-boiled opinions are:

* Every rifle shooter needs to learn to shoot well with iron sights.

* 99% of big game and edible small game is killed within iron sight range.

* It makes the rifle a lot lighter to carry without a scope.

* Iron sights mean you can get to shooting immediately without spending another pile of money on optical sights.

* It's more fun to shoot iron sights.

And anyone who has hunted in the rain or mist will soon find out that backup irons can be a good thing. Wet weather is a more likely scenario for me than sliding down a hillside on my butt and banging the heck out of my rifle.

BearBeater, sorry but I did not mean you specifically just the generic "you". As far as Adobe Walls went, Billy Dixon and the others there were either Buffalo Hunters or as in Billy an Army Scout. Those guys burned more powder in a season than most of us do in a lifetime.I know a lot of guys who don't think one could hit a flock of barns without telescopic sights. I like them. They provide me with beer money from lost bets.

As to the bear movie cited, lack of ANY sights would't be as bad a thing as most think. Once I was shooting a new shotgun at some thrown clays, and ran out of ammo. Someone said, "Well, we don't have any more shells, so I guess we'll have to stop." Since I was having fun, and had a .22 auto in the truck, I said, "No! I've got my .22 in the truck. I'll get that and we'll shoot up the rest of the clays."

"You can't shoot skeet with a RIFLE!" the gal said.

"You just watch me," I said, jokingly. I'd always wondered what I could do, and that day, I decided I'd find out, and have some fun with them doing it.

I loaded 'er up, and told the gal to throw a clay, telling her to make sure she flung it HARD, so it'd fly straight and not yaw off and down - a shot I always have trouble with even with a shotgun. Naturally I didn't tell HER that, but ....

She let the bird fly, and I swung along with it, tapping the trigger as I tracked it. I hit it on the 9th round, and the sound of a 40 gr. lead bullet hitting the clay sounded almost like the clay was shooting BACK!

"Wow!" several exclaimed. "He hit it! He actually hit it!"

Never one to let well enough alone, I smugly told her to throw another, acting as best I could as though I was hurt by their surprise. I'd noticed that the rear sight, which was attached to the dovetail scope base, hindered my alignment on the bird, so decided I'd pull it off and see what that did to help or hinder me.

Well, believe it or not, I hit that bird on the THIRD shot this time!!! Nobody was more surprised than I was, I assure you. More exclamations rose from the unbelieving onlookers.

Not being too bright, I decided to push the envelope until it burst, and called for a third bird. I hit that one on the FIRST shot, believe it or not!!!

Now I may not be too bright, but .... well, just how dumb would you have to BE to try another shot???? I smugly unloaded the rifle, and put it back in the truck, and neither love nor money would have gotten me to try a 4th bird! I may learn slow, but I DO at least learn!

We shoot shotguns all the time with essentially no real sights, so if a bear were charging at close range, I'm not sure that we'd be really handicapped at all, and certainly not as much as we'd tend to think, by not having sights. In the early days of black powder, nobody had sights, and they often survived charges from some nasty beasts without them. Maybe we forget that.

All I know is that like Ken and others have said, an extra scope would likely be a better option, and particularly for guys like me whose eyes don't see as well as they used to with irons. In a defensive situation, lack of sights might not be as bad a problem as we think, but there's still that matter of losing a HUNT as a result of a broken scope. With my eyes, another scope, pre-zeroed in rings, would be a much better choice.

I'll put irons on the Mauser and the '03's, though, but that's mostly just because they wouldn't look right to my eyes without them. That's quite another matter from reality, though, and is probably more nostalgia than anything else. Maybe my grandkids will be able to use those irons one day? I sure hope so. They'll never be real "Shootists" unless they learn, ,and that IS important.