Why don't you post on the medium bores forum the question about sight radius and see what replys you get.....it might be interesting to see what others think about the distance between sights.

Granted almost everyone uses a scope these days but it'll be interesting anyway.
This is an E-Mail Vapo Dog sent me. it referes to a discussion we shared . He has built rifles with rear sights close to front sights a says he sees little adverse effect by using same.
I know from my own experience that fair accuracy can be had with a revolver with six inch barrels. In question would be, Can a 10"or 12" sighting radius be adequate for hunting and to what range? We are seeking fact or opinion. This is not a he's right I'm right thing. Fact is when I still could use open sights I had a Sporterized Carcano carbine with aprox. 12" sight radius and over the hood could hit a 9" paper plate everytime at 100 yds. + and it took it's share of Mule deer. roger

I think it all has to do with the shooter's abilities. When I saw a marksman on the History Channel consistently hit steel pigs at 200 yds with a snub-nosed .38, I realized my own meager shooting skills.

I can shoot as accurately with a quality barrel mounted rear leaf sight as I can with a receiver aperture (hunting style) but not that accurately at equal speed. Just my experience.

Sorry I don't know what the open sight is called but the one on my dad's savage 99 is the most amazing one I have ever used. 250 yards on whitetail no problem. Outside this 150 yards is tops for me. By the way if anyone knows what the name of this sight is please post it. I want one for my 22. I hope they only had one kind of sight on the rifle or some of you will think I'm crazier than you already do. It is a flat fold down sight a large open u with a small open dot at the bottom that the front bead fills. Thanks.

From the British perspective I've shot both the SMLE and the No4 Lee Enfields. And, of course, one has an open notch "mid sight" half way along the barrel and the other a rear receiver mounted aperture sight.

There's no comparison that the better of the two is the No4 system also used on the Pattern '14 or in 30-06 the Model of 1917.

So there's no comparison as to which enables the firer to shoot better and whcih is the quicker in actual use. The aperture.

Certainly at very close range and long range. But I've also shot the SMLE at 1,000 yards in younger days with less old eyes and had no problem holding the bull.

AS to those old notch sights again I've seen them half way along the barrel and just in front of the front receiver ring.

Again there's no doubt in my mind that the nearer to the receiver ring the better. The sight radius is longer and at fifty years old focusing here there and on the target gets more difficult!

So I prefer a rear aperture but if a notch type open sight along the barrel it has to be then the nearer to the receiver the better!

Just my opinion.

For hunting,with "open sights" I think the acuracy advantage of a long sight radius is not that big a deal...

However as many get older it is much easier to see your rear sight if it is farther down the barrel, it is also easier to see the front sight on a longer barrel.

So I think for hunting the advantage of being able to see your sights outweighs the longer sight radius.

Of course with a peep sight "seeing" the rear sight is not an issue.

what makes the relatively short radius of a rear sight that's halfway down the barrel work as good is that the the achor of your cheek on the stock becomes the "rear sight" and you subconsiously align the " thing in the middle" with your line of sight and the front sight. it actually does a couple things that allow accurate aiming. it allows quicker target acuisition because you don't have to first look through that thing in front of your eye, and it eliminate canting the gun by the act of subconsious alignment of a third, middle element in the sight picture.
with a more conventinal place of the rear sight, back, closer to your aiming eye, the gun can be canted and it's not as noticeable.
apertures work the best, but are allot more deliberate. they require more time to aquire the target and most need a little bit of conditoning or training to get used to using one and letting your subconcious do it's job of centering the front sight in the aperture while you simply concentrate on the spot where you want the shot to land. there is a phenomena that actually makes the sight picture sharper when looking through a peep or aperture that has to do with the concentration of light as it passes through the peep and is one reason why peepsights are made with interchangeable discs with different size holes. it's not so much to be able to see through them as much as tayloring the hole size to the sharpest focus with the available light conditions. thay can actually make bad eyes better when you find the right size hole.

quote:

So I think for hunting the advantage of being able to see your sights outweighs the longer sight radius.

Agreed. When the two sights are relatively close together then it becomes easy to focus on both at the same time and this makes them seem more clear.

Personally I see the sight radius as a bit of urban legend as I think the length of the barrel is more inclined to add sight radius.

In other words IMO sight radius is actually the distance between the shooters eye and the front sight, rather the distance between the sights.

There is also another reason to mount the rear sight down the barrel a ways and this is to avoid interferrence with the scope.

I see a lot of rear sights removed for this reason

The concept of a longer sight radius would seem to enable one to 'line-up' with less chance for error, or to put it another way, align the full length of the barrel better. A big factor in precision with iron sights is the size of the front bead or post, and the 'u' or 'v' in the rear. Many older rifles have smaller[thinner] sights than present ones. I have a number of 96' Mausers that I ordered aftermarket front sights from Sarco for; the sights they come with are on around 300 yards. Sarco sights are taller and you simply file till they are on at 100. Then I use the file to make the top 1/16" of front sight thinner. This covers-up less of the target and makes hitting smaller targets easier.

while a long sight radius might make for accurate shooting, personally i'm not able to see the rear sight on my iron sighted rifles.... i like the rear iron about 2" behind the foreend of the stock, way out on the barrel... it may only be a 14" sight radius, but its a clear picture....

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
For hunting,with "open sights" I think the acuracy advantage of a long sight radius is not that big a deal...

However as many get older it is much easier to see your rear sight if it is farther down the barrel, it is also easier to see the front sight on a longer barrel.

So I think for hunting the advantage of being able to see your sights outweighs the longer sight radius.

Of course with a peep sight "seeing" the rear sight is not an issue.

+1

If you have a 12" sight radius and are off in the position of the front site by .010" you will have a 6" aiming error at 200 yards.

For a 20" sight radius the same .010" offset will result in a 3.6" aiming error at 200 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
For hunting,with "open sights" I think the acuracy advantage of a long sight radius is not that big a deal...

However as many get older it is much easier to see your rear sight if it is farther down the barrel, it is also easier to see the front sight on a longer barrel.

So I think for hunting the advantage of being able to see your sights outweighs the longer sight radius.

Of course with a peep sight "seeing" the rear sight is not an issue.

+1

Considering that you shouldn't be focusing on the rear sight I fail to see the advantage of having the sight further down the barrel. I prefer as long a sight radius as practicable.

Shouldn't focus on rear sight, true, but for an open V, it gets a lot easier to line up closer to the front sight. Peeps are another cup of tea, those one would want as close to your eye as possible. open V's, I prefer almost at the end of my foreends - and I like long foreends.

quote:

Originally posted by Bent Fossdal:
Shouldn't focus on rear sight, true, but for an open V, it gets a lot easier to line up closer to the front sight. Peeps are another cup of tea, those one would want as close to your eye as possible. open V's, I prefer almost at the end of my foreends - and I like long foreends.

I guess that explains it, I like short foreends!

I like to shoot a bunch of my old Husqvarnas and their rear sight is placed about 80mm ahead of the front ring. Different strokes I suppose but I can shoot most of these very very well.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
For hunting,with "open sights" I think the acuracy advantage of a long sight radius is not that big a deal...

However as many get older it is much easier to see your rear sight if it is farther down the barrel, it is also easier to see the front sight on a longer barrel.

So I think for hunting the advantage of being able to see your sights outweighs the longer sight radius.

Of course with a peep sight "seeing" the rear sight is not an issue.

+1

Considering that you shouldn't be focusing on the rear sight I fail to see the advantage of having the sight further down the barrel. I prefer as long a sight radius as practicable.

You are not focusing on the rear sight, but you must be able to see it while focusing on the front sight.

I really, really like the "looks" of a rear sight that is placed 2-4 inches ahead of the receiver(like most of the old classic rifles: Rigby, Mauser, etc.). But placing the sight further down the barrel makes it easier to line things up.

Steven Dodd Hughes said that the rear sight usually works best if placed 25 inches from the butt plate. I thought he was full of it. Untill I tried it. As usual SDH was spot on.....

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:


Steven Dodd Hughes said that the rear sight usually works best if placed 25 inches from the butt plate. I thought he was full of it. Untill I tried it. As usual SDH was spot on.....

25" is about 3" or so ahead of the receiver ring. Of course if you like a real short LOP then that would place your rear sight further down the barrel.

Using the "one size fits all" standard LOP used on most factory rifles, 25" is about 4.5" from the ring.

Most custom rifles have a longer LOP, so 25 might be only 2" or 3" down the barrel. Especially if a magnum action is used.

quote:

Originally posted by SDH:
Not being very familliar with Mausers I thought I'd check something out with the only one I own. The unaltered Robt. Schlegelmilch 8mm has pre-1912 German proof marks. The measurement seem quite interesting. As I read the tape the one-fixed one-folding blade rear sight is almost exactly 25" from the butt, and the sight is just about 4 1/2" in front of the large ring receiver. The length of pull on this rifle is very close to 14".
So much for rules?!?

This is the rifle I'm building that Roger is talking about.







It's a Mark X interarms .30-06 that I bought here from (I believe) JBrown

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
...Vapo Dog ...has built rifles with rear sights close to front sights a says he sees little adverse effect by using same.

I've no reason to doubt Vapo, but for me a l-o-n-g-e-r Front and Rear sight spacing is a good bit more accurate. And the "fit" of the Front Sight to the Rear Sight also makes a big difference.

As people in the thread have mentiond, I also try my best to maintain Focus on the Front Sight and let the out-of-focus Rear Sight visually snug-up to the Front Sight as best it can.

quote:

I know from my own experience that fair accuracy can be had with a revolver with six inch barrels.

I'll agree with that when I compare my groups shot with my 6" Deer Hunting Revolver vs. a 2"-3" barrel and very short Sight Spacing. It takes a whole lot of practice for me to maintain an acceptable Accuracy Level with my Revolvers and Pistols. The Short Sight Revolvers just do not shoot as well for me. Not sure if most of it is due to the weight or sight differences, but it is easy to verify by looking at the Targets.

quote:

In question would be, Can a 10"or 12" sighting radius be adequate for hunting and to what range? We are seeking fact or opinion.

Interesting question. I'd think it would depend a lot on the particular Cartridge and the amount of Practice a person is willing to commit to the effort.
-----

Just saw the rifle you all are discussing, the constantly Rusting Blue, always Warping Termite Food "Mouser". Probably doesn't even matter if it has Sights on it for the accuracy you could expect from it. But, if Vapo keeps his shots inside 20-25yds, he should be OK.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Just saw the rifle you all are discussing, the constantly Rusting Blue, always Warping Termite Food "Mouser". Probably doesn't even matter if it has Sights on it for the accuracy you could expect from it. But, if Vapo keeps his shots inside 20-25yds, he should be OK.

If Obama starts taxing fun.....Hot Core will pay off the national debt all by himself in a single year!

V.D. I'm glad you asked me to post this thread. Nice to learn from yhe other side. roger

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
V.D. I'm glad you asked me to post this thread. Nice to learn from yhe other side. roger

Ever since I started attaching Irons to barrels, I've been watchful to not put them such that they interfere with the scope to come next.

In the process I decided I like them that way and that they are easier to see and have not found a loss of functional accuracy due to sighting radius.

I now have Mausers in various stages of completion in 6mm Rem, .25-06, .25-06, 6.5 X 55, .270 Win, .30-06, .30-06, .338-06, .35 Whelen, 9.3 X 62, and .375 H&H as well as my shop completed.

It's snowing like a banche here but the shop is 60 Degrees and I have a lot of work to do on most of the rifles but will attach all the irons at least three inches ahead of any possible scope objective lens. It also aids a bit in carrying the rifle as the rear sight isn't where I like to hold the rifle while walking. Not at all a biggie but another reason to mount the rear sight forward.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bartsche:
V.D. I'm glad you asked me to post this thread. Nice to learn from yhe other side. roger

It's snowing like a banche

No snow here but this morning at 6:00 my car was full of frost and the mountains are full of the soft white fluffy stuff. roger

bartsche
The way I see it, and to add on to another posters point, it's a lot like putting a second (mid-barrel) bead on a shotgun. Cheek weld + rear + front gives you 3 points in alignment with the target.
With a handgun, you lose the rear weld, and have to depend on a rather flexable back anchor (your hand/arm) so are forced to depend on the distance between the 2 sights only.