I can shoot some iron-sighted rifles very well. I can keep 5 shots in an inch pretty regularly with a few of my accurate iron sight rifles. But I bought a Ruger #1 several months back in .270. I shot it with iron sights, and I wondered why all my favorite hand-loads were so terrible (3 to 4 inches). I stuck on a scope, and suddenly I was shooting sub MOA.

I'm wondering if all some of the Milsurp rifles I shot and figured were mediocre just needed a scope or better sights. Especially my 03 Springfields.

I think I have a B Square scope mount in one of these boxes that's no drill and might work to test them. I remember it was hard to fit though.

Any thoughts on accuracy potential of Springfields, accuracy of some irons vs others or scopes, or the B-Square 03 Springfield mount?

Are the irons tight, or a little loosey-goosey?
It doesn't take but milli-inches to throw off a 100-yard group.

There are iron sights and iron sights and there are many variations in terms of bead size, v, u or aperture rear and how well your eyes can rationalise and be consistent on a distant target. Choice of target makes a big difference as well.

And iron sights take a lot of practice and very good technique to be good with. In the same way that Stirling Moss could drive his Gull wing Mercedes on the Mile Mille st average speed of about 100 mph. A reasonably good driver on Accurate Reloading could walk into most Mercedes dealerships and drive out with a modern sportscar in which he could average similar speeds on similar roads without killing himself ad do it in a degree of comfort. Put him in the Gullwing and if he tried to drive at those sorts of speeds he would be dead.

In the same way nowadays we take a standard off the shelf rifle - say a Tikka T3x, put a £400 scope on it and if a reasonably novice shot is not shooting 1” groups something is pretty wrong. A take the same shooter and he will consistently hit a dinner plate a 300m.

You can of course do this with open sights, but you need to be well practiced.

The irons or telescopes simply transfer your visual line of sight onto the target and can be no better than you can see and align them.
Weapon does not matter; it's inherent accuracy potential is what it is, and does not change, regardless of what type of sight the human pointing it, is able to use most effectively.
Which is why, usually, the aperture iron sights are more "accurate" than the open type; various designs. The human eye self aligns round holes onto one another very precisely. If you can see them.

When most of us turn 40 all of a sudden we can't read without holding it way out. Then our arms become too short and we need readers---bifocals in most cases. But if you punch a pin hole into a piece of paper or curl up your finger to make a tiny circle and hold this to your eye, when you look through the tiny hole, it makes your eye focus. That is what glasses do. For that reason aperture sights work well for us old geezers. But for me a scope works even better.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
When most of us turn 40 all of a sudden we can't read without holding it way out. Then our arms become too short and we need readers---bifocals in most cases. But if you punch a pin hole into a piece of paper or curl up your finger to make a tiny circle and hold this to your eye, when you look through the tiny hole, it makes your eye focus. That is what glasses do. For that reason aperture sights work well for us old geezers. But for me a scope works even better.

TRUE! Old man eyes are a Bitch

But, after cataract surgery 20-20 in both eyes & can see forever, great for the woods. $2.00 readers are far better than the $600.00 safety glasses I wore for 30 years

The pin hole test doesn’t make your eyes focus, it prevents abberent light from entering your eye, essentially only letting in the light that is reflected straight off of what you are looking at. It reduces the amount of work your eye has to do to correct all those rays of light coming in from different angles.

I saw a rifle George Hoenig built that had pop-up tang peep that you could use to “crisp” up the sight picture across your irons for longer shots. Damn neat.

BaxterB google pinhole eye test and you might change your answer about the test not making your eye focus.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
BaxterB google pinhole eye test and you might change your answer about the test not making your eye focus.

It doesn’t. Your eye does not change because of the pinhole. The pinhole prevents refracted light from entering your eye’s lens which essentially takes the outer, defective part of your lens out of action. Your eye is still working exactly the same, but because the pinhole only allows light through the center of the lens, the errors are reduced resulting in the perception of better vision.

Imagine if in front of your target you had a steel plate that had a small hole in it. Your shoot the steel with a shotgun. The steel prevents every piece of shot other than the ones directly in line with bull eye from passing through. If you look at your target only you could conclude the shotgun was very accurate. The fact is, the steel, by preventing all OTHER pieces of shot from hitting the target artificially increases the accuracy (as evidenced by the holes in the target) of the shotgun by blocking the errors. Similar idea as the pinhole. Only the straight light gets to pass through the center of your lens and onto your retina. That straight light does not need to be altered by your lens like the “scatter” so you have a very small blur circle, thus the perception of clarity.

It’s also why we squint.

Tsturm, glad your cataract surgery was more successful than mine. I am more like 25/20 -- and of course simply must have the damned readers on for anything small or up close.
It is a real challenge to switch trout flies without the readers. Now I understand why my Dad was so fumbly with his fly gear toward the end of his life.

in theory, the rifle is just as precise (intentional word choice) regardless of sighting system - the accuracy difference CAN be several things - the sights just aren't as good, have mechanical defects, or, what I suspect is more the case, the stock on the sporter rifle isn't conducive to shooting irons as well as the military rifle.

none of these reflect upon the shooter, per se, rather the machine...

so, if it's difficult to have a repeatable sight picture, requiring more movements/locations/positioning then an even precise rifle will appear to be inaccurate to point of aim.

all of my rifles shoot better than i can

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Tsturm, glad your cataract surgery was more successful than mine. I am more like 25/20 -- and of course simply must have the damned readers on for anything small or up close.
It is a real challenge to switch trout flies without the readers. Now I understand why my Dad was so fumbly with his fly gear toward the end of his life.

Thanks

quote:

TRUE! Old man eyes are a Bitch

But, after cataract surgery 20-20 in both eyes & can see forever, great for the woods.

Yep, and part of the outcome with cataract surgery depends on the type and quality of the lenses that you have put in. I opted for the best that they had and I can see far and extremely close-all without glasses. Another part of the surgery may depend on whether the Ophthalmologist is required to also do a slight vision correction similar to a lasik procedure with either eye to correct the eyes to 20/20. I had to have one eye corrected in my cataract surgeries. With all of that said, some individuals might not be able to have their vision corrected to 20/20 for various other reasons.

With the right aiming mark and with both peep and open sights you can shoot very tight groups. In fact a peep sight and ring frot sight and the right aiming mark you can group close enough to a scope.

However, being able to shoot inch groups at 100 yards with the right aiming mark does not mean you could shoot something like a gold ball at 100 yards.

I appreciate everybody's posts.

Yes, I'll have to see if I can't find that no drill attachment to get a scope on the Springfield's and see if they group better than I shot them with the iron sights.

I shoot some irons well enough that I just thought I could judge the accuracy potential of an iron-sighted rifle well enough from my groups with it using the irons, but I've had an example where that's not the case.

And some of the accurate irons are aperture sights, but some are square post and square notch. I even shoot the Buckhorns and front bead on a Marlin 35 Rem really well. I just wonder why I shot the #1's sights so poorly. Whether it's the spacing of the sights, sun on the front sight the day I was shooting, too much coffee, or something else.

And I really want the 03's to be accurate.

Im 85, I wear bifocals and have prescription in the top as well..The glasses correct my vision enough to shoot irons..but Ive shot irons all my life and I still hunt with both a receiver sight and/or barrel mounted shallow Vs for instance...

Im confident with shots to 200 yards and with a rest and time I will take a 300 yard shot at an elk if things are right and I will kill it..

Not saying I don't use a scope, I do most of the time, but not uncomfortable without a scope as so many today are...

Today I have to work on my muscle memory as my body declines all over, no matter how much I exercise, and that effects both scope and iron sight use. I have to work at keeping ahead of it constantly..I get the shakes if I aim too long, so its fast shooting today more or less. I notice its harder shooting a scope than irons these day, I see the scope X floating around and tend to grab at the trigger when the float by the bullseye.that wabble is multiplied times the scope X, and creates a problem, I don't see that wabble with the irons and concentrate on a controlled jerk of the trigger!!

I'm just shy of 75. About ten years ago I was out with a friend shooting. He had a big Weatherby accumark with a big Ziess scope, rifle was chambered in one of the 300 magnums, cannot remember what. I had a Swiss Schmidt Rubin 96/11 with open sights. My rear sight was a Swiss aftermarket adjustable called a Furter , but still a square notch rear leaf. Friend was not having a good day, getting 2-2 1/2" groups at the 100 yard range. I set down using Swiss K-11 military ammo turned in a 10 shot group just under 1". I have been wearing progressive lenses and have thousands of floaters in my eyes. I was just having a good day, doubt if I could repeat that but still ten years later with developing cataracts I can still handle iron sights quite well, prefering apeature types, but for pinpoint accuracy I need a scope.

Beyond 200 yards I probably should be shooting a scope..I like smaller low power scopes, the 3X Leupold is my favorite, but I like the 4X almost as well..My favorite scope in the hard to find these days 2.5X Leupold Alaskan, this one is on my 7x57 fwt. custom rifle.

I have a couple of 2x7x28 Leupolds, a 3x9 on my varmint rifles, the rest are iron sighted, mostly Lyman receiver QDs with a scope for back up..and that changes from time to time..I switch and swap quite a bit..