I prefer iron sights for close cover work anyday.
I feel I have missed a few opportuinties to com home with deer meat, that wouldn't have been missed had I have had iron sights.
Example a few times walking to and from stands etc I have jumped deer in thick stuff at close range and I feel certain that I could of made some of the shots had i of had open sights.

Cause when you jump a deer in close cover if you have iron sights you can keep your eye on it even when you bring your rifle up, with a scope you can point it in the direction but then when you actually look through the scope you actaully have to find it again, and that very short time could cost you the animal especially in a thick cover situation. IMO

In the situation you just described I do better with a scope. I keep it set on 2x and shoot with both eyes open. Faster for my old eyes than focusing on the sights.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
I did in fact try out my iron sights in a rapid fire drill inspired by the previous thread on the Zimbabwe PH exam. It turns out that I can no longer use effectively the factory front sights on a Model 70 Safari Express or a CZ 550 Magnum, they are just too small for my aging eyes to pick up quickly in low light. I am experimenting with larger beads and also with a post sight set-up similar to the ones I am used to on my pistols which I seem to fire accurately enough in a timed drill. But you are right, until just a couple of months ago I had never tried a rapid fire drill with iron sights on my big game rifles.

I'm more curious about problems caused by the height difference between irons and scopes than in the sights themselves, and I rarely see this addressed by anyone with meaningful experience. I was big on back-up irons until I switched from scope to irons mid-hunt, then blew a 20m shot on the finest blacktail buck I have ever seen half an hour later. I did it in front of a witness who has not (and will never) let me forget it, but at least it was a deer and not a lion.

After growing up with them and using them in the military, I love iron sights, especially peeps, and I'm amazed at what I can do with them. But when I was training defensive shooters, we tried to simplify and economize motion. That let them build muscle memory. They could hit things fast by raising the gun to the line of sight they way they had several thousand times in practice. Changing sight systems just before a tense moment strikes me as a bad idea, but I'm hoping that someone here can help me out.

Okie John

There are too many fine DGA rifles out there with express sights. Why bother with one that doesn't have them?

How many of you go on expensive sheep and goat or any other hunts with a slick barrel. Granted a sheep probably won't kill you, but you might stumble and fall and the scope will be useless and there goes your $20k stone sheep hunt, because you didn't have express sights. Or while in sheep country you might fall, break the scope, and then run into an angry grizzly. Guess your screwed again. I wonder how much of this lusting for irons is more of a "coolness" factor. You are going to Africa so how will you kill even an impala without express sights?

I have shot a few Echol's rifles and switched scopes more times then I care to remember. Mostly from our test scopes to client scopes and back and forth. When I'd have a rifle sighted in then take the scope off for any reason then put it back on the worst it was ever off was .5''. Just how small are these elephants?

Remember D'Arcy will build a Legend with irons, just not both. If having just irons isn't good enough for you while stopping myriads of lions and elephants you might want to ask D'Arcy about a PH (who calls his rifle his life insurance for most of the year) with only irons on a Lott.

Oh, and by the way D'Arcy has hunted just a little bit himself.


As a disclaimer I don't work for D'Arcy anymore, these are my thoughts, not necessarily anyone else's. Flame suit on.

Ralphie

One of the problems with big kickers is that the screws holding the rings can become very tight if the rifle has been shot a lot. Big bore shooters commonly find this is Australia where we are using these rifles as "toys" for shooting pigs, kangaroos and goats and in big numbers and hot, dry dusty conditions.

The very widespread, almost universal in fact, use of cross slot mounts on accuracy rifles clearly indicates no problems with accuracy with such a mount.

Let's if we may consider a scenario. We have two Echols rifles, identical except one has cross slot detachables and iron sights and a zeroed scope as back up in another set of rings for the cross slot detachables. The other rifle is the standard Echols legend with fixed mounts.

What advantages do I gain by having fixed mounts...only

Mike

PS Ralphie

I agree with you in general with what you say about point of impact change in moving scopes in and out of rings and especially where there is no stress in the scope/mount set up which would be the case with an Echols rifle.

But it is getting the scope off and on that is the issue.

Mike

Folks, I think many misunderstand the reason for QD mounts, and quality Iorn sights on a rifle used for DG. I have Irons on all my hunting rifles, except target, and long range P-Dog rifles! Here I'll give you an example of the value of a hunting rifle set up this way!

This had nothing to do with dangerous game! I was hunting Muledeer in Pueblo Canyon New Mexico, useing a fine little Mannlicher Shoenauer 1961 MCA, chambered for 243 Win. It had a 3-9x40 scope on it, and it would consistantly print 1.5" five shot groups off the bags @ 200 yds with my very hot handload. This rifle came with irons, a bead front, and one solid fixed 100 yd blade, and a 200 yd flip up. These sights were dead on at those ranges.

This morning I soptted the antlers of a very large deer bedded against a bluff,on the same side of the canyon as I was, but under an overhang, but could only see his horns. I proceded to round a rocky point that jutted out to where maybe I could get a sight on him. The canyon was deep, and my footing was very narrow. I got over balanced, with my rifle in the canyon side hand. It was turn the rifle loose, or go into the canyon myself, I let the rifle go! It fell about six feet, to the little ledge below me, and stopped! Wheeuuuu, I recovered the rifle, and from that little ledge I could see that deer clearly! I raised the rifle, and looked through the scope. It looked a little gray, and it was evident, it was damaged. I looked at it, and found the objective lense houseing was looking down at the rear sight. I yanked the scope off, and from about 175 yds, placed a 100 gr Hornady SP in his ribs! He never got up, but simply lowered his head, and died!
I had a spare rifle in camp, I also had a spare scope already in rings, and zeroed,as well as a spare rifle, but the camp was about eight miles away as the crow flies, accross twenty canyons. My question to you is,at 2;00 o:clock in the afternoon, if I had not had the irons, and went back to camp, would the deer still be looking at me from my wall today? I think not!

On my bolt rifles I use a scope as first choice, always. but the irons are a back-up, that I will not live without, especially on a DGR, but those irons have saved a lot of real hunts in a pinch for lots of people over the decades. In Alaska many live in the back country, and only own one rifle, they break a scope, anddon't have irons, it is not a simple run to the gun store, he may have to wait 4 or 5 months to fix his rifle!

Iron are not arequirement to have a successful DG hunt, but I see no reason to purposely buy a rifle made for that purpose without them! The rifle costs no more with good sights!

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
... And I'm not interested in wood-stocked hunting rifles anymore.........

AD

Another fully matured rifleman.

To my way of thinking, a DGR absolutely must have iron sights. You can have a scope, too, but this would be an accessory in QD mounts.

In fact, I think that all hunting rifles should be so equipped so that you have redundancy in your equipment. I couldn't cope with the frustration of going on a long-dreamt-of hunting trip only to have your scope damaged in transit and not have a set of back-up irons on the rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by ErikD:

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
Unfortunately, Echols will now only build a his 'Classic' with detachable Burgess mounts anymore -- not the 'Legend'.

I understand that he makes very nice rifles. But why in the world do customers put up with having a rifle made, but not having their simple request for detachable mounts heard? Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't it a little silly for a gunmaker to not listen to what his clients want (within reason of course)? One of the points in getting a rifle made, instead of buying a factory product is to have it made to your specs IMO. I'd take my business elsewhere.

I agree with you. Anyone who is unwilling to listen to and honor a customer's reasonable demands is also unworthy of my patronage and money.

Mr. Echols, with that attitude, will never build a rifle for me.

There are far too many people who can build ultra reliable custom rifles to put up with one guy's attitude.

It has dick to do with his attitude. D'Arcy builds rifles without compromise (the very reason he is where he is) and I'd guess he has determined that with that particular stock (read unalterable) their is some compromise. It, the McMillan, was designed for scope use in fixed mounts. His "Classic" doesn't have this particular issue.

Chuck

The main reason to use iron sights is because you like them, they make gun carry very handy and if you can shoot them, its as good as it gets....Up close with mean stuff its the only way to go IMO...

Rip, Rip,
I like wood and blue steel just like my father and his father before him...How can anyone consider themselves mature when their gun is made of plastic and shiney SS, and looks like a car bumper or your wifes apliances. surly you must wear a lace apron when you hunt! I Am sending Ballot slipers so you can tip toe through the high grass...

Chuck

Perhaps he believes detachable type mounts won't deliver the full accuracy he requires on his fibreglass stock gun but on his wood gun he thinks it will be less accurate anyway so allows for detachable mounts on the wood gun.

Mike

Don't think so.

Chuck

Why do you think he allows detachable mounts on his wood rifle but not his fibreglass rifle.

Mike

Probably the biggest advantage gained with D'Arcy's fixed mounts is much more reliability. D'Arcy has used some QD type mounts and feels his fixed mounts are better. By the way having a nice set of mounts put together and istalled properly, and carrying the right tool and extra scope should go along ways towards any difficulty you are having with switching scopes in the field.

In response to another post. There are far too many people who build rifles. I'd like you to show me all these other rifles that are built to the same standards as D'Arcy's.

Ralphie

Your post brings me back to the question of why we will allow QD mounts on his wood rifles. Does he have lower accuracy standards on his wood rifles?

Also, cross slot detachables are widely used on accuracy rifles and some big kickers wnd with far more shots than the average Echols rifle would fire. Undoubtdly two reasons for the widespread use use of detachables on accuracy guns is that they deliver the accuracy and quickly and easily allows a suspect scope to be checked.

Mike

I'll agree that rifles can shoot accurately with QD rings and mounts. I don't think they will hold up to the rigors of hunting and shooting as well as D'Arcy's mounts. Accuracy is not the only, or most important, goal here.

Did you read Chuck's post?

If any of you are serious about buying one of D'Arcy's rifles and are truly wondering about these issues call him and ask about it. I wouldn't bother though if you are just looking to pick a fight.

But what has some people intrigued is that Echolds allows QD mounts and open sights on his wood rifles.

Mike

Mike, he has latitude in stock design with his wood stocked rifles. This, I'm guessing, has something to do with it.

His McMillan stocks are designed with a fixed mounting system in mind. This was the intent from the beginning.

I may be way off here, but I think accuracy has pretty much bugger all to do with it.

Chuck

It seems a strange way to make the rifles.

If you had a wood and fibreglass Echols the fibreglass rifle would be the one you would normally pick if conditions were rough bt the problem would be is that the wood rifle would have the appropriate sighting equipement.

I really has the feel to me of the situation Weatherby do with their 257 and 300 Wby chamberings in the Vanguard.....they only come with 24 inch barrels on the Vanguard so if you want 26 inch you have to move up to the Mark V.

Mike

I'm not sure if I missed something here, but D'Arcy's mounting system on his Legends is a two-piece custom construction which, while it does not offer detachable rings, allows quick removal of the top ring and replacement of pre-zeroed scopes without any loss of accuracy or repeatability. So you get the functionality allowing you to remove and replace scopes, just not "detachable rings." He manufactures the unit as a base/bottom-half ring and top-half ring. Four screws for each ring. He machines each base for each receiver (which he has already re-contoured). Either the original machining of the base/ring bottom is incredibly precise or he laps the inside of the rings. I have removed and exchanged the pair of Leupolds I use on my Legend .375 at least 8-9 times, with less than 1/2 deviation (or as near thereabouts as I can shoot at 100 yards with a 1.5-6X, especially given different lots of ammo). This system is bulletproof for rugged in my view. I have ordered the same scope mounts for my lightweight .300 Win he is building. My guess would be that the "detachable rings only on Classics" is an aesthetic thing, also perhaps driven by the limited availability of Burgess rings (see responses to Allen Day's sale of a pair last week - for which I was too late ). But you should call D'Arcy and ask him why the different choices. Just know the "fixed mounts" work as well for replacing scopes as any system could aspire to.

quote:

Originally posted by S. Texan:
I'm not sure if I missed something here, but D'Arcy's mounting system on his Legends is a two-piece custom construction which, while it does not offer detachable rings, allows quick removal of the top ring and replacement of pre-zeroed scopes without any loss of accuracy or repeatability.

That's the problem! He refuses to attach QD rings and bases, along with Iron sights! The replacement of one scope for another is only half of the proper sighting system on a DGR, IMO! the bases need to be low enough so the iron sights can be used, along with a stock that will accomidate both LOW scope, and HIGH irons!

D'Arcy's rifles are only simi-custom, though they are some of the best done rifles in the world, as far as reliability is concerened, but you buy it his way, or you don't buy it at all!

To me that is not a custom rifle, because it is not made the way I want it! It is just a very expensive rifle that you like or don't like. If you like it the way he builds it, then buy it, I don't. I think the best way to get the best of Echols, is to build a custom rifle, then send it to Echols to smooth it's action to assure proper feeding! Or have him simply build a barreled action with no sighting system at all, then finish it yourself! I don't think he will do either of those things, but maybe! However, he is not the only smith in the world who can true an action!

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Nelson:
It has dick to do with his attitude. D'Arcy builds rifles without compromise (the very reason he is where he is) and I'd guess he has determined that with that particular stock (read unalterable) their is some compromise. It, the McMillan, was designed for scope use in fixed mounts. His "Classic" doesn't have this particular issue.

Chuck

Whether or not there is a compromise of any kind to using metallic sights in conjunction with the Legacy stocked rifle is not for Mr. Echols to decide. That is for the customer to decide.

Whatever his reputation, I know at least three or four riflesmiths that can equal or exceed his quality and do it while saying "the customer is always right".

HP Shooter, I'm sorry, but what an absolute pile of horse shit! On both counts.

Why don't you give David Miller a call and ask him to build you a custom 700 with a 28" stainless barrel and synthetic stock? Oh, and tell him up front you're right.

Maybe call up Mel Forbes and ask for a 9.5lb finely ornamented wood stocked 416 for your next safari. Ask him for detachable mounts and iron sights, and be sure and tell him your right.

The main reason any gunsmith would take on just about any client whim is that they aren't good enough to hold much of a client base. Eigther because they are building a reputation or just plain suck at what they do. It's the same in any business.

Chuck

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Nelson:
HP Shooter, I'm sorry, but what an absolute pile of horse shit! On both counts.

Why don't you give David Miller a call and ask him to build you a custom 700 with a 28" stainless barrel and synthetic stock? Oh, and tell him up front you're right.

Maybe call up Mel Forbes and ask for a 9.5lb finely ornamented wood stocked 416 for your next safari. Ask him for detachable mounts and iron sights, and be sure and tell him your right.

The main reason any gunsmith would take on just about any client whim is that they aren't good enough to hold much of a client base. Eigther because they are building a reputation or just plain suck at what they do. It's the same in any business.

Chuck

There is a HUGE difference between asking a gunsmith to make a minor addition to a rifle which is, in the overall, the kind of rifle he normally builds; and asking a gunsmith to build a rifle radically different from what he specializes in.

Chuck, you are absolutely correct, Mr. Echols should be allowed to make what ever he wants, and as long as there are those who want what he makes, it is fine with me! But you see, the question was "WOULD YOU BUY AN XPENSIVE "CUSTOM" DGR WITH A FIXED MOUNT?" The fact is, if it has a fixed mount, and that is not what you want, then it is not a custom rifle, though it is very well done. you can't call what he does custom! A custom rifle is made to order, no matter what the buyer asked for! As I said he can tell you he wont build it that way, the alternitive is, you don't have to buy it! Everyone is misunderstanding the point, Myself or others are not saying what Echols does is bad, it isn't! What is being said is, that the Echols is an example of a fine rifle that is made the way the question asked about, nothing more!

Definition

MAIN ENTRY (2) custom

Date 1830

#1 : made or performed to personal order

QUESTION ANSWERED

When it comes to the bigger bore rifles, say 375 and up I still think Echols is trying to force the customer to take the more expensive wood rifle by offering more appropriate sighting equipment on the wood rifle.

Any defence of the "mechanical" pluses of his fixed mounts being a requirement is all shot down by himself because he changes to allowing detachable mounts if you take the more expensive wood rifle.

Mike

OK HP give those two builders a call and ask them to use detachable mounts.

quote:

Whatever his reputation, I know at least three or four riflesmiths that can equal or exceed his quality and do it while saying "the customer is always right".

I'm curious as to who these "three or four" builders are.

Mac, most people who have rifles "custom" ordered generally gravitate to builders with similar ideas. There is a reason for that.

Chuck

Chuck

Where Echols is probably unigue is he is possibly the only individualy gunsmith or factory that insists that his big bore rifles be built in Varmint hunting configuration.

Actually that is not really true as about all true accuracy rifles use cross slot detachable mounts in both small and big calibres.

Mike

quote:

I would, no doubt. An Echols Legend in 416 rem would be a prime example. A pre-zeroed marked scope with a screw driver/feeler guage toolkit will have you back in business in no time. It's been done with resounding success.

Chuck

This was my original response to the original question and it was actually in reference to a LH legend in 416 that I handled and shot. This rifle was equipped with a fixed mounting system. Would I persue dangerous with that rifle? In a heartbeat, and it wasn't cause it was built like some varmint rifle.

Chuck

Chuck,

If a big bore rifle gets shot a lot and especially where there is lots of dust...and I assume cleaning solvents etc get the dust into the threads....then undoing scope ring screws can be a big deal.

I have seen a 460 Wby with Leupold Dual Dovetails that needed the screws drilled out to get the rings off.

Of course these are more extreme conditions than in Afican hunting as you have people shooting the shit out of kangaroos, pigs and goats with bore rifles, sort of scaled up varmint hunting and a vehicle roaring around the place chasing the animals. Lots of dust and lots of shots being fired.

In short, Echols Legend is something you can put up with but it is second grade when conditions are rough.

If fixed mounts were so great then all the tactical, sniper and accuracy people would be using them.....but they don't and for good reason.

If Echols thought fixed mounts were required then he would have them on his wood rifle.

It is a simple case you will find of him picking up some extra dollars on the plastic gun by only supplying mounts he makes himself and at the same time if the person wants a proper rifle then he provides the more expensive wood option. Simple business.

No different to Weatherby with 24 inch barrels in 257 and 300 Wby on the Vanguard. If you want the 26 inch barrel you must buy the Mark V.

Mike

quote:

If Echols thought fixed mounts were required then he would have them on his wood rifle.

He does, in fact on most I've seen.

Mike why ask anything on these forums? You seem to have all the answers yourself.

Chuck

Chuck,

I have found you learn by putting forward opinions and then people refute them if they are wrong.

By the way, is it true that Echols will do the Legend as an iron sight only rifle. If so that makes a mockery of the Legend being designed for scope use only.

Mike

Mike, all I know is that D'Arcy has told me face to face that when that stock was designed, he did not envision or intend to have it used with iron sights.

Oh, by the way, he has built Legends with detachable mounts and iron sights in the past. I think I even shot one once?

Chuck

Chuck

I am still betting he has just made a business decision and the principle involved is widely used.

Weatherby do exactly the same thing with their standard rifles, Product Upgrades, pre packaged Custom Rifles, Build a Custom Gun and so on.

For example, if want open sights on a standadr Wby via Product Upgrade you can only have those ordinary Williams sights. To get the good sights you are forced into a higher level of rifle.

Mike