Sure, barrels look naked without irons.
And irons are handy when proping a rifle up agin a tree or something.
Also, once a rifle barrel slipped out of my hands when I was about to prop it up and wouldn'ta happened with a front sight on.

When I was 25 I wanted iron sights on all my rifles. Now that I'm 55 can't use them anyway!!
I vote for bare barrels.

What if you are on an expensive hunt, and you drop your rifle on the scope, then SNAP?! Thats why I like iron sights.

quote:

Is this the trend or just me?

I have always prefered iron sights for my deer hunting of 100 yds or less. I have scoped rifles also but they don't see much action if any at all.

To each his own, but when I see a rifle with iron sights it say to me it is old fashioned or out of date. Sorta like shag carpet or plaid pants.

Iron sight's are great on my Thutty-Thutty, but worthless on my 300 Weatherby!

Hey Vapodog, I like both. So since that wasn't an option I'll let you mentally add one more to each.

I grew up shooting Fixed and Adjustable Iron sites and still enjoy using them. An Iron Site rifle fits my hand well when carrying. Only shortcoming is in low light where a scope really helps sort out the Spikes from the Does.

Fixed and Adjustable sites shoot fairly well at distance when you get used to them, but here again the Scope is better - most of the time.

Frosty humid mornings or any cold morning combined with exhaling can render a scope useless. Then you have to go through the hand movement to clear the lens and if the Game is close you might as well stand up and dance.

People say Scopes are "fragle", but the same can be said for Adjustable Iron Sights. Bump one and you are in the same situation as having a Scope, not knowing if it will still send the Bullet where you want it to go or not.

As light in weight as you can get a Scope, it is difficult to match some Fixed and Adjustable designs.

So, I like both styles and use them to my best advantage depending on the Hunting situation.

I never had much use for open sites before I moved to alaska. The fact that we are normally so far away from any quick replacements makes me want the extra insurance of open sights. I like peeps and specifically ghost rings sights much more than standard iron sights. Most of my rifles are quick detach rings and ghost ring backup sights.

I voted for a bare barrel but the specifics need to be layed out.

Long ago most guns came with irons and I ended up with them even while using a scope.

The thing is that the only time I needed move a scope out of the way in a hurry is when I did not have QD rings. Even then that may not have been fast enough.

My Ruger 1A has irons and so does my 99's. Irons look good on those guns.

In most cases a scope is better for hunting for many reasons.

quote:

Originally posted by Thebear_78: I like peeps and specifically ghost rings sights much more than standard iron sights.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Thebear_78: Most of my rifles are quick detach rings and ghost ring backup sights.

Excellent setup

Although I like when a scoped rifle has open sites I never went to the trouble to add them if they didnt come stock. I have never "broke" a scope on a hunt yet, although I am sure it can happen.

I had a scope go bad when sighting-in for a hunt that I'd flown across a couple of continets to attend. Didn't have open sights on that rifle and I was fortunate enough to have time to fix the issue (mounted a Buddie's spare scope) but the rifle(s) I take on every hunting trip has open sights on it now.

I also sight-in the open sights with the ammo that will be used.

I am no fan of open sights, the only place I see a use is on pistols and levers.

I pretty much always take a back up rifle on hunts. And if for some reason I could only take one rifle on a far off hunt. Then I would b4 taking a second scope in rings all set to go as a back up.

I personally see no reason for irons on a rifle. It makes for good chats but for me it is not worth the work.

I also dispise the idea of irons in a gun case and or scabbard.

Just my 7 cents

Mark D

I voted plain but w/ a caveat for good irons on a DG rifle or any rifle used primarily under 100yds.

Old eyes don't see iron sights very well.

I've always liked iron sights. I especially like the ballistically adjusted peep we used on M-16's in the Marine Corps. But I sort of thought it was just sentimental attachment.

In Africa we had heavy rain one day while after kudu. My VXIII would get unusable about 3-4 seconds after I wiped it out. I use (and had then) Leupold QD rings, but no iron sights on that rifle, and the backup scope didn't have RainGuard, either. We saw a kudu less than 250 yards away, but I couldn't have seen to shoot. I could have made the shot easy with iron sights.

It was my buddy's last day, so I wasn't shooting (he did end up getting a kudu after the rain slowed down some), but I value iron backups, and I hope to put them on all my hunting rifles.

I have since also bought a Bushnell scope with Raingaurd to carry as a backup.

IMO a rifle, especially a big bore rifle, looks unfinished without a nice set of open sights.

Vapadog,

I am a confirmed fan of both. And my best answer is yes, no, and maybe. With that jelly fish answer I should throw in my rational. It depends entirely on the rifle, and example in the no iron sights column would be a small ring mauser chambered in a 257 Roberts or a 6.5x55 Swede. Light rifle, compact clean lines with a short barrel, compact 2-7x scope, nothing else is required or desirable. In the maybe category is a 270/280/30-06- and 30 mag class of rifle, if I can get a QD scope system on these rifles that I have back up iron sights on, life is good. The devil in this detail is I want GOOD quality iron sights, most factory sights are not good sights, just cheap parts tagged on a rifle, the front sights are usually OK but the rear sights usually are scrap pile junk. Given the choice between having them and not having sights I will perfer no sights and insist on excellent optics. But when good aftermarket iron sights and attention is paid to this, its a definate plus in my book.

Another class of rifle I like iron sights on is what for any better term the classic woods rifle. Whitetail/black bear rifle in close cover a 100 yard shoot is a long one and rare. On this I like a short rifle, peep sight, in a caliber range from 7mm-08 Remington to 35 Remington ( and a whole lot of cartridges in between, such as 358 WIn, 38-55, 308 Win this is not a exclusive cartridge list just a range of what works in my boat ) Anyway this has no scope only iron sights and the MUST be a rear peep. It can be a lever ( like a Savge 99 ) a small bolt, or even a trombone if that floats your boat. Its all about quick and handling and personal preferences rifles that I personally like would be the before mentioned Savage, old Marlin lever guns, a Model 100 Wincheser ( with some help ) all fit this bill.

And the last category are big bore rifles, simply the iron sights are first choice, they must be on the rifle, the optics are optional, but perfered.

In a quick recap, three out of my four scenarios I want iron sights, but there still is a place for a classic sporter with clean lines in my world. Some of my favorite rifles are set up this way, and it wouldn't be honest to say that this style of rifle doesn't still give me a lot of enjoyment, to me its a classic mule deer and antelope rifle.

I wish list item for me is that the factories put iron sights back on rifles, I liked having the option and the new rifles with No irons are a definate negative in my book.

Vapodog,

I voted yes to iron sights. My hunting can often vary from longer distances to very close conditions on the same day out. So a rifle with a detachable scope combined with iron sights is the way to go for me. Also as backup incase something happens to the scope.

Aesthetically, I also just like the looks of a rifle with open sights. A barrel without looks kind of naked to me. But that's just a matter of taste, and has nothing to do with the functional reasons I mentioned first.

Of course all my big and medium bores have iron sights and I wouldn't have one with out them. My deer/sheep/elk rifle (270 win) doesn't and I have never missed them on it in the last 34 years.

465H&H

Some rifles need them, some don't. In my battery, generally CRF have sights and PF don't...

Including my age! I am with westernmassman... now that I'm 55 I can't see the irons well enought to use them. Yes they look pretty, and they can be the best part of a short range system. But if you can't see them...

quote:

Originally posted by 9.3x62:
Some rifles need them, some don't. In my battery, generally CRF have sights and PF don't...

Is this a reason for one or the other that I can't see?

vapo, I have mostly peeps/ghosts and a couple with rear Lyman dovetail. I am amazed at how many rifles that are sold without "irons". Still again finding "optics" to be most suited for down range.

Most of my hunting guns have QD mounts with backup open or peep sights....sure came in handy this year with all the rain and sleet opening week where I hunted...


Bob

On my lever rifles? Yes, I keep the iron

On the longer reaching bolt rifles? No.

On my '06 Semi-auto? Nope, no iron.

AllanD

quote:

Originally posted by JAL:

quote:

Originally posted by 9.3x62:
Some rifles need them, some don't. In my battery, generally CRF have sights and PF don't...

Is this a reason for one or the other that I can't see?

About the only time I ever use open sights is when following up a bear or when following a large game animal into a very dense area where bears frequent. Anytime a run in may be possible, I use a CRF rifle with a scope in QR rings and bases. Thus, I've only bothered installing sights on my CRF rifles...

My PFs (most of which are sub-30 caliber) get the nod in more open conditions and/or where bears are scare or absent. Hunting deer in thick stuff (in non-bear areas) I usually have a PF rifle with a 1-4x scope with caps, which works fine for close shots in most any conditions. No need for irons...

Anyway, that's how it has played out in my battery...

Scopes all the way. I am relearning the value of a good 1.5x5 or a nice clear 2x7. I'm gonna guess that a 1.5 is as quick as any open sights. Especially those buckhorn things.
I hunted elk for years with a 300winnie with a 1.5x5 on top of it. Never felt in the least handicapped, neither in the dark timber nor the more open meadows.
I carry a back up scope to camp. Rings and all ready to be switched out. As ugly as they are, Weaver bases and rings work well for this. Knock on wood, I've never needed the back up scope.

I like to have them. They don't weight anything and having them doesn't hurt anything and it's better to have them and not need them than to need them and not have them. If I'm on a hunt where I am packing in to a spike camp to hunt I'm not carrying a spare rifle or scope, they're too damn heavy! And they work just as well on a 300 WBY as a 30-30, you just have to get a little closer. Unless there's some strange law of physics to where a 300 WBY won't work at close range? Maby someone can explain that to me.

I'm 57. For me iron sight are just dead weight.

So then for those that do not carry a back up rifle, what do you do if your scope breaks and you are on a paid hunt?

Obviousely a DGR should have open sights, but even on spike camp hunts I don't have a problem packing in a spare pre zeroed scope in QD mounts a 1.5 x 5 weights 9.3 ozs.

If it is a concern, or if the hunt is remote, pack a spare scope. In such conditions, I'd like pack a spare scope even if my rifle had sights...

Optics are good...

quote:

Obviousely a DGR should have open sights, but even on spike camp hunts I don't have a problem packing in a spare pre zeroed scope in QD mounts a 1.5 x 5 weights 9.3 ozs.

Great idea, especially when you travel across the world for a hunt.

Believe me you don't have to wiat for 55 for the poor close vision thing to hit. It started at 45 for me. Even with that I'll keep iron sights (high visibility, ugly but useable) on my DG double but have it equipped with a QD scope.

quote:

Originally posted by iwzbeeman:

I hunted elk for years with a 300winnie with a 1.5x5 on top of it. Never felt in the least handicapped, neither in the dark timber nor the more open meadows.
I carry a back up scope to camp. Rings and all ready to be switched out. As ugly as they are, Weaver bases and rings work well for this. Knock on wood, I've never needed the back up scope.

I''ve never shot any of my elk with iron sights either...but I always have them on my rifles, sighted in. With my luck, a spare scope back in camp would be just as useful as no scope at all. That would tell me I still needed the "irons" for insurance.

Sure as heck, if my scope went gunnysack, the biggest bull I'd ever hope to see would rise slowly out of his bed and stand looking at me from 70 yards, while I was hiking my way back to camp two miles away to get my spare scope after a tumble or other failure-causing incident. And it would probably be 30 minutes before dark, too.

Not arguing for or against iron sights, just saying that whatever anyone's spare sighting arrangement is, it's not a useable spare unless it is with a person while he's hunting.

That's why lots of the Germanic tradition rifles (and Scots deer-stalking rifles) came with a nice leather carrying case and shoulder strap for the scope. Enables one to carry it safely as either a primary or spare sight while hunting.

Vapodog:
I haven't read all of the post on this but I just voted "for". Guess my hunting trips are different than many other hunters but whenever we go in the field, it's for an extended period of time. Moose season alone is about 3 weeks. Sheep hunt? that's gonna be a minimum of 10 days with no contact with the outside world. I think we all agree hunting is much more expensive now than even 5 years ago. Shoot! I just spoke with a bush flying service about flying 2 of us in for a sheep hunt this Aug. His quote? $1250 each for a super cub. So, I'm gonna take a chance on spending this kind of money for for a 2 week trip & hope that nothing happens to my scope? I don't think so. At least, if something does happen to the scope, I'll still have a chance. All of my hunting rifles have open sights on them for back up & I won't take a rifle on a trip without them.
Some of you might note that I've harped on this on the board many times in the past. So much for the long diatribe.
Bear in Fairbanks

Irons sights can't possibly be bad BUT they can only be good if you really need them in a pinch. Sure, when will that happen? Perhaps never but if it did....Its like 4x4, when you need it, you typically really need it. You may be in a hunt camp, damage your scope and render it unusable...you may be able to borrow a rifle or new scope but if you have irons, you can remove the scope and still hunt even if you need to limit your shots.

They don't have an adverse affect, so my vote is for irons...

I don't think I have ever shot a head of big game with iron sights in the past 37 years of hunting. I have missed a couple because of using iron sights.

What I have found it is much easier to pick out holes in brush shoot around trees and limbs with a scope then with irons. See game in poor light ect. I have seen iron sights put out of service my rain or snow also. How ever looked through your irons and had a snow flake or a rain drop fill in the peep sight or rear notch I have.

I have also seen front sights get broken off rear sights get knock out of ajustment.

No I good scope is the way to go for most hunting situations.

If I were carring a rifle just for real close range selfdefense under 25 yards a good ghost ring peep would work well just to cut the weight down. A good lower power scope on a properly fitted rifle is just as fast. plus allows a much greater chance of hitting farther targets if needed.

Put irons on if you want put with a proper scope and properly fitted rifle I do not see much of a need. I would much rather have a spare scope or rifle in camp. We all talk about scope failing ok.

Put those of you would talk about needing them it that happens what are you going to do if your fireing pin spring the pin it self, extector ect breaks.

Stuff happens irons sights are a cure for just one of many things that could put a rifle out of service.

That is why I belive in having one spare rifle ready to go in camp for every 3 hunters or so.

I didn't vote because for me the answer is not as cut/dry as options:
I want my barrel bare...no sights
I want iron sights on my rifle barrel.

My answer is some of both! And it depends on the rifle and its intended function.

Small game - Scoped rifle, No iron sights or Shotgun, Not scoped

Turkey - Shotgun, Not scoped

Deer - Prefer scope and no iron sights but always take a spare rifle on hunts of more than 1 day.

Hogs - one rifle is scoped with iron sights and one is just iron sights.

Hope y'all are getting the picture?