I recently bought what I feel is a perfect hunting rifle and one of the reasons I like it so much is because it has iron sights. It's a 30-06 Husqvarna and weighs 6 lbs. It shoulders like it was made to fit. I shot my first animal with it at 85 yards. I spotted it at about 300 yards but that was outside my ability with the sights so I worked to get closer and ended well.

But, that has be thinking should I have a scoped rifle?

Depends on what you want. I'd not one to be a thing inside of 200 yards with an open sighted gun I'm good with.

I like scopes in the thick stuff though. Open areas are much easier with open sights, which seems to counter how most folks approach things.

Much easier picking out a lane in the brush at 70 yards with a scope than any open sight.

I much prefer scopes on rifles even on close shots for the reasons that Steelhead mentions, finding lanes and openings in the brush. I tried the peep sights on my 1895G and got good out to 200yds with it but I never had the confidence with it in the woods because I try my best to shoot through holes not through sticks when hunting. It now wears a 2.5x20 Leupold.

Put a good receiver sight and a blade front on that HV and you will feel comfortable with shooting a longgggg way.

I shoot deer with 1.5-6x42 scopes mostly. Mostly they stay at 1.5x, and I can shoot them as well as irons. I use them like steelie. I use them to reach out. I am older now and my eyes just aren't what they used to be, so I am ever more dependent upon them. I won't be going back now.

To do what?
If I want to punch one in the ear I want a scope at 25 yards+.
If I'm punching lungs I figure I'm good to a couple hundred.

Twice I have killed deer in the woods at 13 short steps. For me I guess I need a scope if I am going hunting.

Scopes don't help you shoot better. They help you see better. On a target range, with a black bull against white paper, I can shoot effectively hundreds of yards. But in the field, my target can easily be much harder to see. Heck, in bad light, I might not even be able to see the front sight.
It doesn't take much scope to really help one see better. Even the 2.5X scopes help alot. E

Around my mid fifties I found I need a scope at all distances. But as stated by previous posts, there are several reasons to use a scope besides distance. Low light, more accurate bullet placement and having your sights and target on the same focal plain are just a few.

That's entirely up to you and your eyesight. My eyes suck, so I feel I need to use a scope to reliably make clean shots. I owe it to the animal to do so..

I have all of my rifles scoped. My vision is not what it used to be!

My vision is WAY better than it used to be since I had cataract surgery. I wouldn't think of going hunting, at any range, without a scope on the firearm .

Scopes are so rugged and dependable and inexpensive anymore, there is hardly any downside to them, except if you want to worry about the extra weight they add.
One huge advantage of a scope is that they allow you to shoot accurately in low light, like early morning or late evening, when animals tend to be most active.

Royce

Like most, I'm far more comfortable with glass than with irons and 98% of my hunting is with glass. That being said, this season I'm going to do a little more hunting with irons. I have several stands that I can carry two rifles into. Yesterday, I checked the sights on three of my iron sighted rifles, a model 1895 .405, a 71 .348 and a Husqvarna Mauser 9.3x57. The lever guns wear Lyman peeps while the bolt gun has the factory open sights. I'll alternate carrying one of the open sighted guns, along with a scoped gun, and if a good clear, easy shot at 100 yards or less presents itself, I'll reach for the "irons". Just tired of having these fine rifles sitting in the safe and not seeing the forest.

Bringing 2 rifles, that's silly.

I hunt some every year with irons, and apparently my eyes are still good to go for that purpose even at 62. But I also think a lot of hunters think their eyes aren't good enough for irons anymore mostly because they haven't shot much with irons for a while.

I don't hunt with irons because I think they're better than a scope. Instead I hunt with them because it's fun, in several ways. In fact one of the things I'd forgotten about hunting with irons was relearned about a dozen years ago on an all-irons safari in Africa, where I took a Cape buffalo and five head of plains game. I relearned that hunting with good, rugged iron sights was more pleasurable not just because of the hunting, but because there wasn't any damn worry about cleaning scopes, or worrying if they'd get knocked out of alignment, or suddenly go batschidt. Instead I just went hunting.

As far as the distance where I "need" a scope, it isn't so much distance as overall conditions. On that safari the six animals were taken at ranges from about 75 to 225 yards, and the only miss occurred on an impala where I hurried the shot, because some nearby giraffes had spotted me and were getting nervous, which made the impala nervous. I got nervous, and simply pulled the shot. But all the others went where aimed.

Have killed a few other animals at 200-225 with irons over the years, but my longest was 350 on a bull caribou. Conditions were right (open country, decent light, stationary animal, prone position) and the shot was actually pretty easy.

Limiting yourself to carrying just 2 is silly, maybe I'll pick up a golf bag and carry all my rifles like clubs, maybe use one of my boys as a caddy!

With my aging eyes, sightes are harder to focus...expecially when light fades.

I've killed deer that I could see in my scope that I would have never been able to shoot with irons.

Yep, can't kill at the last second of legal light etc etc. but I don't care.

As JB said, I do it because it's fun. If the animal wins, then the animal wins, I don't care. No big deal to have to pass up a shot.


This was 15 minutes before sunrise. If it mattered I couldn't tell.

I also add that I shoot via open sights probably 5 times as much as I do scoped rifles these days.

Scopes for me at any range.
Allows better shot placement

Thats how I felt when I had good vision.

Now at 55 years old a scope is a must.

Come to think of it, I haven't shot irons since I was a kid. I guess I just prefer a scoped rifle.

Nice 99, Steelhead.

Hell, I must shoot 50 shots a day from the BB gun with open sights.

Open sights don't work worth a hoot if you don't 'practice' with them.

I've met more than a few that don't like apertures because they can't focus on the aperture because its too close. They don't have a clue how to use them.

I'll just say when I was shooting irons almost every day, and if not shooting, dry firing, I killed a deer on the other side of 500 with irons. it was past the half way mark past too...

As with other things, the only things you have to know is can you do it and are the conditions such that they will allow you to do so on the first shot every time.

And that distance changes needless to say.

As far as the "need" for a scope, it is definitely on the far side of 200 yards.....farther on a "perfect" shot situation.

My eyes aren't what they once were but I can still consistently hit a squirrel in the head at 25-30 yards (In my younger days I aimed for the eye...not just the head). At 200 yards I still feel confident in shooting deer size game with open sights. At 100 yards any shot is a slam-dunk with open sights.

However, other that when hunting with muzzleloaders or occasionally with the few rifles I have that are not scoped....I "choose" to use scopes because of the aiming precision they make possible. At longer ranges this is very much true but even at how-do-you-do ranges of less than 25 yards the scope allows me to slip the bullet through small openings much easier.

The only exception would be at close range, moving targets. I have tried low-power scopes and peep sights....but on fast moving, close animals I still do better and feel more confident with traditional open sights.

Maybe it is because of the years I spent using those type sights back when we used to hunt deer with dogs....but (for me) scopes and peep sights just aren't as fast to get into action as open sights.

If I "knew" I was going to be presented with a close, fast moving target....such as when following a wounded bear or hog into a thicket...I'd feel most comfortable with a shallow "V" rear sight (express style) and a fairly large bead front sight.

Those situations are admittedly rare. Even when slip hunting (still hunting is what most call it) in thickets....I choose a low-powered scope most of the time. Quick, moving shots "can" happen in this type hunting....but not as often as you might think (that is "if" you have any decent skill at the "slipping" part of the hunt). Most shots will be at standing or slow moving game.....which often aren't even aware they are being hunted.

tarzan, I grew up shooting irons,and think that I was pretty fair with them.But,I also learned early on,the advantages of a scope. Given a rifle with proper fit and a low power scope,I'd take a scope over irons starting pretty much at the muzzle.If the lighting is poor,hands-down a quality scope trumps irons every time! At least for me! memtb

The only firearm I own that doesn't wear a scope is my T/C Hawkens 50 cal. The furthest shot on a deer was 140 yards down thru some open hardwoods. Punched the windpipe from the lungs and he only went 50 yards and piled up. Closest shot was 12 yards.

All my centerfire rifles wear a scope. Some do have mounted sights but I like them scoped.

Ken

Scopes help you see the target in poor light, Has nothing to do with range, a scope is just as useful at 20 yards as 200. In good light I'm almost as good with irons at 200 yards as with glass. In poor light I can't the sights or the target with irons. This is where a scope comes in handy. They are a much better option in thick, dark brush than irons because they allow you to see holes in the brush to shoot through. It can bee too dark to see the irons at 4 PM on a cloudy day in winter in some thick spots where I hunt.

Most people use too much magnification. A 1X or 2X scope is faster on target up close than irons. My favorite variables are either 1-4X or 2-7X. I almost never take them off the lowest setting for anything other than zeroing.

Most people don't practice. If they have 3-9X or 4-12X and practice quickly bringing up the rifle and looking through the scope at the target on its highest magnification setting, when they go hunting the 3X or the 4X looks like a wide screen TV. The hunter will be just as fast with this as he would be with a 1X.

75-100 yds for deer. Could push that to 150 for a brownie.

One of the best uses of scopes for me, and this requires much more than 1-2X is determining if its still the legal or even the buck I want when they are meandering around, and i've switched from binocs to gun.

The other HUGE thing that has bitten me twice, once with a red dot, and once with a low power scope, is not being able to see an intervening twig...

Hence I really have about zip use for a low power scope for actual hunting.

For the defensive AR they work great but I'm about as good and quick with irons anyway and a ghost ring, you just have to practice and stay sharp. And for a defensive gun for big animals that bite and you have to stop... there a twig won't be an issue...

What I've learned from this thread is there are a BUNCH of folks that haven't spent the time to learn open/aperture sights, therefore they (open sights) are inferior.

I'm not saying they are better than scopes, but I see a lot of folks that have ZERO experience. Which is on par for the 'Fire.

I prefer a scope even close. Low power and both eyes open works for me, even it the thick stuff.

Now, as my eyes get older, a scope is even 'mo better'.

Like has been stated at 60years old I find seeing open sights is much more difficult than in the past regular open or peep sight. plus like some have said its easier to see small obstructions in the thicker stuff. I will say probably 90% of my deer hunting has been with a 4x fixed or a variable set at 2 or 3 power. It doesn't take much.

I've used open/aperture sights quite a bit. I recall on several occasions using Redfield peeps to shoot sub MOA groups at 300 yards shooting prone. But, to me, a scope has been the ticket for the past 15-20 years.

Scopes are definitely better for picking out openings to shoot through but irons are not without their merits. I'm partial to aperture rear sights. No need to worry about the rear sight, merely look at the front sight and put it where you want. Your eye naturally centers the front sight in the aperture without conscious effort.
I find that if casually shooting offhand at clay targets at 100 yards, I'll break more with irons than with a scope. My theory on it is you are more relaxed with irons because you don't notice every little movement and try to correct for it like you do with a scope.

Enjoying the benefits of private property are you?

I've been playing with a set of XS ghost ring sights on a rifle this spring. Given good light, I'd say that up to 100 yards I'd be very confident of hitting a deer in the lungs with them. I can also see that in dim or poor light, the scope would make a huge difference even at closer ranges. But I was after a handy rifle that I could carry easily around the farm, so decided to sacrifice the scope on this one. The aperture sight is far and away better than the factory opens...you can see your target, and only have a front sight and the target to worry about.

When I lived in Alaska, I carried an M71 (Browning) that I rebarrelled to .375/348 Imp with a 20" barrel, because it mounted so quickly that I believed there was nothing that would point like it. It has a Williams receiver-sight on it and I still have it. I carried it in case something BIG happened to pop out of the brush. I lived in SE Alaska, so anyone who has been there will know my thoughts.
I like to chase rabbits here in Nevada with an M94 .25/35 Imp, and it has a Redfield receiver-sight on it. I can shoot out to about 200 yards reliably (at a sitting rabbit). Here it is quite possible to see that far.
I also use an M92 (Rossi) .256 WinMag with a Lyman tang-sight, for rabbits. At 67years, if (when) I miss, it's not the sights.
Recently, I was "gifted" an M99 takedown, like Steelhead's, but mine is a .250/3000. (I wish it were in as good a shape as his...I'm gonna have to restock it) I has the factory buckhorn, and I'll prolly leave it alone. It's dropped a LOT of northeastern Nevada mulie bucks in it's time.
The rest of my rifles are customs, mostly Mausers, built for special purposes, from predator calling, through ground-squirrel, to big game like longer-ranged (300 yards at unmolested Deer) to grizzly and Elk/Moose. None have iron sights. They each have a scope that is appropriate for what it seeks. Several have low- to medium-power scopes with Lee dots that vary from 2 1/2x to 6x with 1moa to 4moa.
I used to have scopes with 2x4s(flat-topped posts) for woodsy-type huntin', but the Lees have replaced them.
I believe the reticle is more important than the power. The idea of only having one focal-field is great. Ya can SEE.
Have fun,
Gene

While on the subject of open sights. I think one of the problems w open sights is the poor design of most that come on factory rifles. I haven't seen a decent post type front sight on a factory rifle manufactured in the past 40 years and most of the bead type sights are way too fine.

It's all about precision of placement for me. I hate wounding animals. My eyes are getting worse, so I lean towards scopes now, for all ranges. However, I've killed deer out to 90 yds with open sights, but where I hunt, that's a longish shot. I've used irons out to 500 in competition, but a bad shot only costs points. Where I hunt, a 30 yard shot is more likely than a 200 yard shot, and I'll probably shoot through brush and will need to pick a lane. For these reasons, all of my hunting rifles are scoped.

A lot around here run see-thru rings with a 3-9x50 on their 30/30, you know, just incase they get too close or it's too dark to see through your scope................

I'll agree with Steelhead on this one. People who denigrate aperture sights never gave them a fair shake, or chose the easy way out when their eyes started to go south on them. My 62 year old eyes are as bad as anybody's here, and most of my hunting/shooting is with aperture rear sights. (Why? Because like JB said, it's fun.) There are many tricks to employ that allow one to do that, if one has the desire to learn.

I have a couple hunting rifles that are scoped via Griffin&Howe QD mounts, but with those rifles the scope is actually the backup sighting system secondary to the receiver sight main sighting systems. The scope is carried either in a day pack or in a leather tube slung over my shoulder. I too don't eat my heart out if I have to pass up a shot in low light due to inability to see the sights.

Where I do rely on scopes is with varmint rifles and one particular squirrel rifle, with which to make precision hits on little beady brown eyes peeking out through tiny openings that I can't even see with the naked eye. I guess that re-inforces some sentiments expressed here earlier.

Bingo!


My Browning B92 .44 Mag has factory buckhorn irons. I'm not going to change it because it was a gift from Dad. On sunny days I have no problems hitting clay pigeons at 100 yards but the biggest bull I've ever had in my sights got walking papers at that distance because it was overcast and I was in the aspens, which further darkened things. Couldn't get a good sight picture and finally let the bull walk.

All my other rifles and even my .44 Mag handgun have scopes. Someone said scopes don't help you shoot better, they help you see better. I disagree - when I can't see the irons I can't shoot well.

With open sights I have taken animals out to 85 yards - a Krag, and an original High Wall. IIRC one of my deer fell to a 99 with receiver sight.

My Sharps has done a couple inches at 200 yards, and at some point I will give it a whirl on game.

In rereading the post title, I guess that I need to change my answer somewhat.The apparent intent of the post was a what distance was a scope "needed".The answer to that question has more possible answers than the obamacare bill has pages.My answer was based on preference and not on need. When answering the "need" question, I will make an attempt a somewhat intelligent response. When just plinking,or taking small game at reasonable ranges and lighting,iron sights/aperture sights are fun to use and certainly have their place.I do some handgun hunting with open sights,but pick my hunt terrain and lighting with my limitations in mind,and only then when we have elk in the freezer. If my primary objective is to put meat on the table or a possible trophy animal,I want every advantage I can put into my arsenal.This may mean hunting until last light,or in heavy timber/brush where poor lighting or picking a hole to shoot through is more probable than possible. I guess it all boils down to,if I'm serious or merely having fun! memtb

I'm of the same opinion.
My Savage 300's and a couple of Schmidt Rubins I have, iron sights, I feel confident out to 200 yards. 9" pie plates don't stand a chance.

FWIW I started out with open sights, as a lot of people did. I had been shooting for several years before I owned a scope, and even now, 40 years later, I have several rifles without scopes.

As I enter my 50s I have to say that open iron sights are getting harder to use, especially in lower light. As someone said above, a lot of factory opens are poorly designed too, which doesn't help, but a good wide square notch and a square post, the design I have on a couple of rifles, works reasonably well - good enough to plug a pig or deer at maybe 100 yards anyway.

Better still is an aperture sight, and I have several rifles with these. They work fine for the sort of distances I'd usually shoot game - far more often at under 200 yards than over 200. I've shot with aperture sights on the range out to 1000 yards, and IMHO as long as you can see a reasonably distinct aiming mark they give away little in accuracy to a hunting scope. By way of actual comparison on my .45/70 the groups with a scope on 5x were about 1 1/4" at 100 yards, and about 1 1/2" with a peep.

Undeniably the scope is better in very low light though. Better when the target is hard to make out too, whether because it is obscured by cover or the same colour as the background. I've found that a low magnification scope is also very fast to use - fast enough to shoot clay pigeons when mounted on my combination or drilling, and certainly fast enough to bowl over running game - I don't think that open sights have any advantage at all in this regard, at least for me.

The main area where, at least in my own experience, a scope falls down compared to aperture or even open sights is in rain. Rain on the lenses, or fogging on the exterior from my own breath in wet conditions, has cost me opportunities, though some of the newer coatings seem to be an improvement.

The scope also adds weight of course, but not much with the smaller scopes I prefer, and needs a bit more looking after than a solidly-made set of open or peep sights.

Possibly the best solution, and the one I have on several hunting firearms, is a scope which can be detached quickly by hand, and replaced without losing zero, backed up by a good aperture or open sight setup (which is also properly zeroed of course). That way if I have a bad spill, or it starts raining, I can take the scope off and keep hunting.

Some of the nicest days for still hunting or tracking back here is when it's snowing or raining...not blizzards or downpours but enough to smear lenses constantly if you are on the move.

Shots are generally on the short side( not unusual to walk up on a buck under those conditions),and a good receiver sight with aperture removed is as good as it gets for that stuff.

These conditions inevitably pop up every year here. 99% of the time a scope is the right tool, but there are times when it's just a PITA and can cost an opportunity.

I guess I don't understand this question? Do you guys actually hunt where you know exactly how far you'll be shooting each time? If so, I guess it would be easy to decide if you can take out the rifle with the open/iron sights one day, or a scope another day. As for me and most guys I hunt with, we really don't know how far off game is going to appear- 20 yards to 450 yards at any time during the day would be typical.
Since I don't know which range I will be shooting at game, all my hunting rifles wear scopes except a couple .22's I own. I don't take the scope off for the day so that I can shoot within my set range for that particular day. So, if you're using irons and you see game beyond your self set range, do you just let it walk?
To me, being prepared for whatever comes your way is hunting and a scope fills that bill better than any other system. Your mileage may vary.

Bob

tarzan I have not read this whole thread but WHEN you are far sighted, as I am, you can NOT use iron sights because the rear is so fuzzy you can NOT be precise (as precise as one can be with irons anyway).

I can shoot handguns because the gun is ARM'S length, but with a rifle the rear sight is too close. So I have no choice but to use a scope with ALL rifles from 22 RF up.

Yep, if I can't get any closer. What's the big deal? I don't feel emasculated if I pass up a shot I'm not comfortable with.

Sheister,
I'm with you on this one. I will use every legal means that I can to fill the freezer with meat. Once that is accomplished, and I'm hunting for pure pleasure, then I could consider open sights, handguns, etc. memtb

The answer should be yes no matter the sighting system.

If it is too far away get closer. That applies whether I'm hunting with a scoped rifle, one with open sights, a shotgun, a bow, whatever. You need to know what your maximum is with the gear you have, and stay within it.

Getting closer is at least half the fun anyway. There's nothing like the charge I get from it, and succeeding despite the advantages the animal has. And if I can't get close enough to make the shot there'll always be other opportunities. YMMV

My limit is 250 yards. With a peep on my hunting rifle (30-06) I can keep 8 out of 10 shots on an 8" paper plate. If it's further, I get closer. Now military "meat" hits, I'm good to 600 yards. I still shoot military High Power matches to stay in practice.

It's an individual thing....have fun, Tom

I hunt with open sights/peep sights, when I do, for the enjoyment it brings. I would definitely let a critter walk that I did not think I could hit well.

Fortunately, that has never happened when I've been hunting with open sights. Maybe they make me sneakier!?

Somewhere between forty to fifty years of age. When you need readers you cant focus on the rear sight, and the front sight, and the target or animal. That is when most folks "need" a scope.

Not necessarily. That age range is when it hit me, and at age 62 with very myopic vision and old folks' short range focus issues I still function quite well with iron sights. Several approaches can work.

Do what I did and consult your optometrist for help. Since I wear contacts in lieu of glasses (and put on reading glasses over top of them to, well, read), he advised a couple of things:
A) He gave me a contact to wear in my dominant (right) eye that altered me to focus to arm's length (somehow), and keep the target in acceptable focus which allows shooting a pistol.
B) He suggested utilizing apertures to focus the light. That can mean a special purpose aperture attached to my shooting glasses (or even just a piece of tape with a tiny hole in it, slapped on the shooting glasses lens in front of my dominant eye), or adopting tang/receiver sights for rifle shooting (with adjustable irises or selections of discs with different diameter apertures, to adapt to varying light conditions).
C) While wearing contacts for basic vision correction, slip on a pair of low power el-cheapo reading glasses, 1.00x or 1.25x, to allow short range focusing of sights and still retain an acceptably focused target. That's the system I use when shooting an iron sighted .22 or a primitive muzzle loader and it works surprisingly well. I even use this trick when hunting with a primitive muzzle loader, by perching the glasses down on the tip of my nose while hunting and pushing them up in front of my eyes with my stock-gripping thumb as I shoulder the rifle to shoot. A little practice makes that motion second nature.

Are these tricks a panacea for failing vision? No, but they work pretty well and serve to keep me in the shooting game using equipment that I most prefer for personal reasons.

I thought the only guys with scopes shot those big shiny Weatherby magnums? Scopes are a fad. They're never going to catch on.






Oh wait...

These days I need a scope for anything past the end of my barrel.

Neil

I don't think I'd do go past 100 yards. only open sight rifle I have is a 30/30 and at 100 yards I don't have the tightest groups. So I will limit my self to that until I can shoot better with a different better gun.

With the buckhorns on my TC sidelock coupled with it's rainbow trajectory with the big conicals I shoot I limit myself to 75-80yards.

My high powered rifles that wear Lyman and Redfield aperture sights and Sourdough post fronts I have no issue shooting 250-300 yards on stuff I'd shoot that far away with any other rifle. Sighting in so the bullets land on top of the post at 100 yards allows me to shoot some pretty decent groups with irons and gives me the confidence to know I can make hits well past common "woods" ranges.

I'm not very old but I don't have really good vision either. Getting away from bead front sights and buckhorn rears opened up a whole other genre of rifle for me when I discovered post fronts and peeps with the aperture removed. I enjoy shooting and hunting with irons so much I've built a couple rifles that are stocked for irons and have no holes for mounting a scope. I've also bought or traded into a few that aren't drilled and won't be as long as I own them. I hunt with all of them and enjoy it. I've even went as far as making a peep for my Marlin 39 on my lunchbreak, it's all friction adjustments with no lead screws but it looks pretty good and works as well as anything for zeroing it and leaving it.
The Mrs and I are flying out for a long weekend of bear hunting Friday evening, my guncase will have my Remington 30 Express 30/06 in it with a Redfield peep, Whelen sling with hook eye swivels, and most likely a box of 200gr Partition handloads. I'll let you know how it turns out but I'm betting that if I get within 250 yards there'll be dead bear pictures.

Good luck TK.

i have a good friend thats closing in on 60yrs old that has hunted his whole life with a win 94 with open sights. he's killed some real trophies with it over the years.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS!

guess I am in good company...

Like some of the other folks who posted here I need a scope at any distance. Age related - I am 54. That said I like fixed power scopes in the 4x to 6x range for regular hunting/shooting. Doesn't need to be high power.

Jwall, that's my problem with true open sites. But with an aperture (or peep) site, the fuzziness of the ring doesn't matter. Your eye will automatically put the bead in the center of the ring. If you haven't tried one, you should give it some consideration.

I have a minor correction for distance but the amount is enough so I can only focus on my M-14 front sight using a corrective lens. The rest of my firearms it's a choice of clearly seeing the front sight or or the target/animal. Scopes work best for me.

It REALLY helps when you have an eye doctor (Opthi...what ever the hell they call it) who is a shooter. When I described my problem, he immediately knew what to do.

I use bi-focals that work really well for seeing as well as shooting, Close range reading requires extra lenses, but sights are not a problem. I discovered my sight problem when I ran out of adjustment in my scopes. Damned....you think that was a problem??

Just recently....in my back yard (I have a 100 yard range in my back yard).....I found I could clear 10 beer cans quicker than my younger cousin with open sights. I can't see the righting on the cans like I used to but I can still see the cans just fine (30 years younger doesn't make enough difference).

At 100 yards...minute of beer can is good enough..... and it's good enough on game too.

This is my position on this issue as well. I used to be just flat deadly with iron sights but today is a new day and I feel I need low power big tube optics.

I have a Leupold 1.75 x 6 on my big magnum and a new Vortex 2.5 x 10 with a 30mm tube on my 270WSM. I like them both. But I have fixed power scopes and use them with confidence. For me its simple - if I cannot see well then what good is it.

I have a nice 4 x 12 Vortex with a 1" tube I am thinking of selling because it is just to hard to live with. It would be great for hunting Antelope or long range Mule Deer but I just do not do that much hunting like that.