I have two rifles set up with peeps and blades, but have been told that the bead is the way to go...whaddya think?

i've done both.. prefer blade on big bores.. pumkin on a post

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
i've done both.. prefer blade on big bores.. pumkin on a post

+1

My 500 AccRel is set up the same way and I love it

A hooded flat top post front is 'best' for hunting. Same thing without the hood is second best because we can see the post in any light more consistantly than a round bead.

A round faced bead will make us shoot away from the sun - left, right or low - because the bright spot is what we see best and that's what will control how we aim. And it's difficult to see the top of a round bead clearly in dim light so people tend to shoot high in twilight or on foggy/rainey days.

Peeps (apeture sights really) are the best irons available and easily the equal of a scope for modest ranges in deep woods hunting.

Remove the 'target' apature disc and sight through the threaded hole when hunting, you will lose very little accuracy but sighting will be much easier and reliable. The tiny target disc holes are too small for either quick sighting or for any use in dim morning and evening light. AND a single drop of water or snow flake will block it.

bead

Ya'll have me thinking. My Lott has a bead -- a pretty large one -- but I've shot thousands of rounds through a peep with a post in competition. Maybe I should go back to what I'm most familiar with.

Alternatively, for those of you who like beads, what size bead for large bore?

quote:

bead

Por que amigo?

quote:

Remove the 'target' apature disc and sight through the threaded hole when hunting, you will lose very little accuracy but sighting will be much easier and reliable. The tiny target disc holes are too small for either quick sighting or for any use in dim morning and evening light. AND a single drop of water or snow flake will block it.

I use the Talley and the aperture is a decent size. I am considering making a third (my Mod70 375) a peep setup and it's got a bead on it already. I can easily put on an NECG with a blade.

Thanks for the response.

quote:

Por que amigo?

The very top of the bead is theoretically a single point/dot/or whatever you want to call it. Assuming one's eyes are good enough, using this single point is, to me, pinpoint precision. But then I have only shot relatively close stuff.

It just makes more sense than a post with no precise aiming point.

I live in circa 1900 and have no intention of changing, so don't bother me with trying to convince that any newfangled something is better.

Can you try the different types?

I like beads, white or fiber optic yellow. Just my personal preference after shooting various types.

I have blades on mine with a selection of blade heights depending on what ammo I intend to shoot, from plinking cast bullets up to hunting loads. Have brass faced blades ground back at the top to better catch light for bush hunting. These have been good out to about 200 yds so far.
Do have a silver bead but seldom use it and consider it more usefull for short range.

Von Gruff.

quote:

Can you try the different types?

I should be able to, but since I have two already with blades I was just querying the peanut gallery since a guy mentioned the beads. I recently had my dad machine the stock NECG blade from .100 to .050 and I like it much better. The .100 just seemed like a hell of a lot of blade out there.

My .505 Gibbs has a bead on the ramp and a blade in the grip cap trap. My theory is that the bead is better for open sights, the blade for aperture sights, but with a spring loaded detent in the ramp, I can choose whichever one I want to suit the conditions.

For accuracy and minimal light affect, go with a blade.

For under 100M, minute-of-big game animal shooting, go with what you like and are fastest with.

I'm thinking ivory or fiber optic bead front for visibility in dim light or against a dark target.

I have both and I can't tell any difference as to which shoots better for hunting purposes. For target shooting, I like a blade front.

I much prefer the fiber optic bead myself

I got a brass blade on my double with a peep. Sitting in the deer stand on a hog hunt, I lost the ability to see the brass blade on deer long before I lost the light. I took my lighter and smoked it black and got 15 more minutes with my eyes. Black over brass! Someday I will do the test with a white bead or fiber optic.

JD

Does anyone still make good adjustable apeture sights? A good number of years ago before the military switched to all these rapid fire plastic guns, we were taught to shoot with apeture sights. Using a blade front with an adjustable rear sight. We set in to start what was called "Battle Sights" which was the sights set for a 300 yd zero. This setting would keep a shot on a man size target at 300 yds. Something like this would seem to make good sense to me. As fast as standing rear sight and a lot more accurate. I still shoot a lot of Black Powder Creedmore matches and use open sights out to 1000 yds. Just a matter of getting used to them. Yes I know this is not shooting DG at 35 ft. But it worked for a couple different wars.

Aaron

bead

Maybe the best compromise would be like the Call bead I have on my 3 1/2" Mdl 27 S&W 357. It's a post with a gold bead on the face at the top. It was ordered from the S&W shop in 1952 and I have never found a better front sight till the fiber optics came out.

If one is shooting at double rifle distances, I don't know that it makes much of a difference..I would think a bead would be easier to acquire in those conditions. But for longer ranges, I prefer a blade, with the POI right on top of the blade. Handgun shooting kind of trains you for such sights.

Blade for target work. Bead for field.

For hunting at dusk or later, or in dark bush, I prefer a large (at least 1/8" diameter) white bead.

For target use at known distances, I prefer a flat top and flat faced, vertical-faced post....mostly because when needed I can accurately "frame" the post.

quote:

Originally posted by Carolina Man:
Does anyone still make good adjustable apeture sights?

I took my .505 to Africa equipped with a Lyman 48 receiver sight and used it to kill five Cape buffalo, three elephants and a rhino. They are no longer made, but are frequently listed on eBay

quote:

Originally posted by Dan416:
Blade for target work. Bead for field.

+1

Alberta Canuck has it right: large bead 1/8". Big bores seem to lend themselves to relatively large targets at relatively close ranges where time is of the essence. Seeing the front sight is the name of the game. Use the whole bead as the spot to place the bullet on close, fast stuff and use the top edge of the bead when time allows or distance requires. Zero the gun using the top edge.

I much prefer the blade..

I like the gold faced post from NECG. Why? because I can set the receiver sight down low to the rear receiver ring, then file in the post to zero, and then I don't have my receiver sight sitting up high over the rear ring and prone to damage.

With a bead your stuck with rear sight height or playing games finding the right height for a proper sight in. Sighting in at a specific range distance with the optional given heights of the beads can often be a royal pain..With the blade you can file it down to the exact POI you want, and still have some latitude for adjustments with different loads and still be down close to the rear action ring.

With the blade,you can also use a dovetailed solid peep sight that has no adjustment, a very compact and strong option and one I prefer to all other irons with perhaps the shallow V being the exception. With this set up you file the front blade to zero, and use the dovetail for windage, if installed properly you will be very close to center on windage as the action and barrel are close to center with the world.

I also like the square sight picture with the reciever sight hole at .125 for fast and accurate shooting. I shoot irons more than I do scopes on DG, especially in Africa, but also in the thick stuff in Idaho and Texas, and I have played with most all the iron sight options.

I also like the square gold faced blade from NECG with the shallow V and I sight it in to hold the blade even with the top of the V, much like a pistol sight..Its very fast and accurate that way..In fact its an old Texas Ranger trick for shooting at a run horseback, and it works great for all my hunting. Tried and true by one of the greatest fighting forces in history.

The above options work in good or bad light, and they do give one a little more of a sight picture than all but the smallest of beads, as the range increases.

This has worked well for me over the years, but each of us must arrive at our own choices on such matters, what works for one may or may not work for someone else...Everyone should try them all, I have sees so many iron sighted guns that have never had the scope off, and the irons have never been sighted in and others that the owners have give very little thought to other than more or less sighting them in at 25 or 50 yards.

quote:

I like the gold faced post from NECG

That is one I do have and just had it thinned to .050. Its in the universal base to it has a bit of adjustability already along with the filing.

I I think i;ll stick with the balde for my under 375 guns and try the bead with the 375 and up. I like the put the dot on it and shoot it approach. Will try them out.... gracias amigos.

I used to own an old rifle with double aperture sights.
It was very fast and fun on the range since you put the target in the center of the front aperture.

Cheers, John

For hunting, I pefer a post with a peep sight.

With a double rifle and an open V rear sight I prefer a bead.

With a handgun, most of the time I prefer a post, however for high speed up close handgun hunting I prefer a wide V and a bead.

I have the Freedom Arms Express sights on my 475 L and I like them.

An iron sighted big bore is used for shots up to about 100 yards max with a few exceptions, and is advisable for following bad stuff in the bush..

I have my favorites, but in reality it makes no difference what so ever if its a bead or post at those ranges, as long as the gun is sighted in to the desired POI...

Of more importance is do you sight in to cover the shot or do you want the POI to be a tad high so you can see your target over the top of your hold..I want my bullet to strike an inch or even two inches over my hold at 25 to 50 yards. I prefer this so that I can actually see what I am shooting at and its not covered up by my front sight. I do prefer the gold faced post from NECG or the Redfield Sourdough, but I am not at all adversed to a ivory, red or gold, 3/32 bead,

What I do not like is that oh so popular big flip up bead that near covers up the front of a buffalo's head.

NECG Red Fiber Optic

I like the red glowing beauty also, toss the crap cover, it covers a buffalo head at certain ranges..

I like a square top blade with a peep, and I like a large bead with a shallow v.

As for hoods, I was sent through a school for one of the Sig rifles which had a regulated sight hood. For accuracy, you used the peep with the front blade, for close quarter, you looked over the rear sight and painted center mass with the hood. The hood was regulated to hit dead center at 25 meters. I liked it so much that I had the front sights on my bear rifle changed so that the hood was regulated in the same manner. Inside 25-30 yards you paint center mass with the hood, it's about as quick as painting center mass with your thumbnail, very quick.

Best

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
i've done both.. prefer blade on big bores.. pumkin on a post

I have Peeps on several rifles and I like the post for quick shooting 100yrds or less but love the bead for longer, finer work.