Greetings,

I still prefer iron sights as opposed to telescopics on my big game rifles. The work well for me as I can usually keep my shots to 200 yards or under. (I also do not own any long range type of arms)

For those of you who regularly use aperature sights, what style front sight do you prefer?

Post or bead?

What color bead do you like best?

Any comments on the fibre optic front beads? I have not tried one yet.

Regards,

------------------
~Holmes

Holmes,

I learned to shoot apertures 30 years ago in the USMC, so I like the post or partridge front sight. I think the round beads are better from a theoretical standpoint, but whenever the heat is on I instinctively center the top of the front sight rather than centering the bead.

Old habits die hard.

Don

Like Don I learned to shoot in the USMC, so with aperature sights I prefer a post.

Other then a std post, the only other one I seem to be quite found of is the black with white center stripe offered by Ashley.

I never met a bead front sight that I liked, they do not work for me.

I use the Fiberoptic bead on my duck gun when we shoot in very poor weather, other then that I don't see a real application on a big game gun as they do not seem to offer a very refined sight picture.

[This message has been edited by Bill (edited 07-11-2001).]

As a retired Devil Dog, I too prefer a post front sight.

Hello

I learned to shoot with a Remington 510P, so was brought up on a peep sight with a post in front. I shoot an aperture front sight on occasion for smallbore matches, but have a post on the 513T most of the time as well. My .22 revolver has a peep sight with a front post, also...

Tom

I geuss you'd have to call it a post. I like the old Redfield Sourdough front sight. It was a post with a "gold" tip slanteds to pick up light during early morning and late evening times. Worked great on a Model 94 Winchester I used to own with a Lyman receiver sight. Sure wished they'd bring that one back.
Paul B.

In specific response to Holmes inquiry about fiber optic sights. I have just installed my second set. The first set was on my M70 Win (push feed) .375-338. This rifle had factory installed Williams iron sights. I had played around with painting the front bead with epoxy model paint (red and orange.) This worked o.k., but I wanted something better.

I bought a set of Firesights from Williams. At first, I replace the front bead only. This was very nice. I balked at the rear sight (two green dot on either side of the "U" notch) as the machining and fit up was not too good. I asked for a replacement (which they sent) and it was still garbage. I had to have my gunsmith tap the set screw to hold the elevation adjustment tightly.

This is my primary "bear country" rifle for Southeast Alaska. It does not wear a scope. Most of my deer hunting is in the late fall, so it's low-light, rain or wet snow and close range shooting. 90% of my shots are under 75 yds. For this reason, I really like this setup. I can hold 1 to 1.5" at 50 yards, which is good enuff for my purposes. I made a couple of very nice shots with it last year on a couple of deer.

I just picked up a set of TruGlo sights for my Rem 700 in .338 Win. The fit up of these sights is better than the Williams.

These type of sights have their "niche" but they're not for everyone. I've lost a number of opportunities with scoped rifles in poor weather (most folks would stay home I'm sure) due to fogged lenses, screwing around with scope covers, etc. Deer don't like much movement when they're right next to you. Flipping up scope covers with make 'em flich too. I'd feel much better in a bear charge situation with iron sights - no ifs, ands or buts about this. It will hurt a bit more though when he rams that thing up my a@*.

I think I will try this gun with the see-thru scope rings so both sighting systems are available. It sure think these are an ugly setup, though.

Gentlemen,

Thank you for the replies.

I, too, learned to shoot in the service although I was RA Infantry, 71-73. (Marines, hold your tongues!)

I began hunting after my discharge and stayed with iron sights as they were what I knew. Later, I primarily hunted with handguns. Most of these had rear peer blades that I would fashion myself.

Using a scope has never been comfortable for me. My offhand shooting with telescopics is really quite pathetic. Given a good solid rest I can usually do rather well with a scope but I still am more confident with my iron apertures.

I purchased an 1885 low wall and installed a Columbia Precision tang peep and was trying to decide what front sight to mate with it. All my friends use beads and each had their own colour recommendation! In all honesty, the beads do not define as well for me. I really prefer the post.

I ended up using one of the Ashley .080 front posts with the vertical white and it is great! If I can see the prairie dog without aid, it is not long for this world!

Recently, I banged up the Williams Foolproof on my M70 .375 H&H and decided to replace it with an NECG rear aperture, or other brand as long as it was all steel. Since this is an all around rifle and is used on big game, I contemplated one of the fibre optic sights such as those Lars mentions. My concern is the lack of definition that Bill refers to.

I believe I shall end up trying one of the Fire Sights, however, I am going to order an Ashley, as well, in case the former does not pan out.

I shall let you know what happens.

Take care all.

------------------
~Holmes

before a fiber sight, I would seriously research getting a tritium front sight if at all possible. Those things are the best by far in a low light situation! Unfortunately, my Brownells catalog is upstairs next to my bed, and if I go up there I'm not coming back down, otherwise I'd look and see if anyone makes such an animal. Otherwise I would buy a tritium archery pin ($14 more of less) and see if I could make something nice looking. Don't want to break that vial though! Anyway, if I were to have only irons on a working rifle, that's what I'd use.