Thebear_78:

Since the rifle is a Lott, I presume it's meant for dangerous game? If that's the case, then contrast this post with Richard Harland's (an African PH with a great deal more experience than Mr. Boddington's) below it:

quote:

Originally posted by Magnunman:
Boddington almost missed a buffalo at 70 yards because he didn't get the front bead all the way in the bottom of the rear sight. His 50 plus year old eyes(mine too) can't focus that well any more.

They're both right. Sure, if you're just not that comfortable with irons - and I think you need to work on that - then a scope will help a little with shot placement beyond 75 yards or so. But if a follow-up ensues, it will only be a hindrance and needs to come off, as Mr. Harland suggests.

Another long time African PH, the late Sten Cedergren, got hammered by a buffalo that a client wounded and Sten had to follow up. When the party left the car, a tracker had grabbed Sten's scoped .458 instead of his double .470 with express sights. He blamed himself for not taking the time to correct what he knew to be a serious error before following up.

I wouldn't scope a .458 Lott at all, but there's nothing wrong with doing so if you prefer. However, you still need detachable mounts and express sights.

quote:

And they are brush catchers.

...and a scope isn't?!!!
----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Always carried a scope on my 375 H&H, 416, 450, and even 500 rifles for a time, but when I stated hunting ele and buffalo in the thick jesse, the scopes came off. Now my eyes are not the same as 40 years ago and I never have been that proficient with iron sights. But I started practicing and got much better, off hand of course, and now can equal my 50 yards off hand shooting with the scopes on. An angry elephant at less than ten yards is no time to be looking at cross hairs. Richard Harland is right, all the African PH's have learned by experience and most BG PH's are iron men.

Dak

To me the sacrilage is putting a scope on the Lott...

The notion that scopes are necessarily always slower than iron sights for follow ups at close range is wrong.

In very thick brush, a scope will generally be slower. Otherwise, where visibility is not so restricted, and in practiced hands, a scope can be faster to use than irons.

On the other hand, scopes are not as robust as irons, and they are not really needed for close range work on DG.

Pick your poison is how I see it.

On a big bore or Dangerous game rifle I'd have irons. They don't catch any more brush than a scope does and they don't fog with errant breath or get rain drops all over them to obscure the view.

Welcome to the forum ugly.

On a classy H+H or Purdey I would give the vote to die by reason of heresy but I think this is a matter of preference.

I use iron sights on my 458 in Zim since I like hunting in April/May and the elephants like the heavy bush and the range is pretty close. I find I can acquire my target much faster with open sights as opposed to a scope

I finally decided I am going to go with the Brockmans pop up peep. I have this set up on my 375 H&H and really like the pop up peep and talley bases. I'll probably go with one of the XS sight systems white line blade front post. Its a really nice setup for a peep.

looks great!

that is pic of my 375. It is a really handy system and plenty accurate out to 100 yards. I have a large tritium bead on the 375 that makes it harder to aim at longer ranges. I'm going with the whiteline post for the 458 Lott, just as good in low light and better for aiming longer distance. I had the XS system sights on my marlin guide gun for a while and it was much easier to aim at longer range than a bead front.

The only reason I was hesitant to use the P-U-P again was it can make scope selection kind of difficult because of the width of the action and lack of talley extenstion rings.