[Dionysusigma]

I'm on another one of my sometimes pointless quests for a gun that meets particular criteria, and I've come up against a wall. I'm looking for a rifle that:

1) Is bolt-action
2) Is chambered in .308 with a capacity of (at least) five rounds
3) Current production (not a milsurp)
4) Has iron sights

Doesn't seem like much, does it? Well, after looking at the sites (no pun intended) for Remington, Winchester, Ruger, Marlin (for the heck of it), Savage, Sako, Tikka, and CZ, you know what I found?

Only the Sako 75.

CZ, Tikka, and Remington came close with a couple, but only the Sako actually met the basic four. One would think that there'd be more that did, but... even if we include milsurps, I can only think of two that would work -- an Ishapore Enfield, and a Spanish Guardia Mauser. Yes, there is Steyr, too... but IMO it's a bit costly. In a perfect world, the Savage Scout would still be in production and be able to take M-14 mags. :D

Are there any others out there, or am I just being too picky?

[SamlautRanger]

CZ makes a mannlicher style stock version with 20" barrel in .308 and has fixed iron sights. Has a detachable 4 round .308 mag.

Ruger has the 18" barrell international in .308. Believe mag only holds 4 though.

Also, the new Remington 673 Guide Gun comes in .308 and has iron sights and a nice laminated stock

If you want a custom, check out Brockman's Rifles. (will cost around $2500) has iron or ghost ring sights, 5 round mag and stripper clip notch.

Or you can just buy a regular bolt action .308 without iron sight, and send it to a gun smith who will add a set of iron sights to it for around usually $150.

Seems everyone just want no iron sight anymore, have to only have a scope. I mean how else can you take those 500 meter hunting shots! ( to me hunting is about stalking as close as you can and then getting a shot-I do not see the need for anything, IMHO, more powerful than a 4x scope)

[jefnvk]

Don't know if it comes in 308 but my buddy just got a Savage 110 in .30-06 with irons.

[355sigfan]

Personally I don't see much use for Iron sights on a bolt gun. With the exception of big bore dangerious game guns in 375 H&H and up. And it seems marketing trends seem to agree with me.
Pat

[SamlautRanger]

Another option for you in .308 with Iron sights, though technically not a Bolt Gun. Check out the Browning Lever actions in .308. Bascially is a bolt gun that is operated by a lever, instead of a bolt handle.

[444]

I have heard people talk about back in the day when everyone hunted with iron sights. I have to point out that if you look at gun books and magazines from that time period, the iron sights were a hell of a lot better than what comes on a rifle today. The factory iron sights on most rifles today were just an after thought and are not real functional: although I realize they will work, just not well.
I do a lot of shooting with iron sights on centerfire rifles (milsurps). IMO, if I wanted a serious rifle with iron sights, I would go the custom route: and it wouldn't be expensive at all. Put a good peep like a Lyman on a bolt rifle or something like that.

[Wildalaska]

Personally I don't see much use for Iron sights on a bolt gun. With the exception of big bore dangerious game guns in 375 H&H and up. And it seems marketing trends seem to agree with me.

Guess ya never busted a scope huh

WildthatswhysightareonmilitarygunsAlaska

[355sigfan]

Nope I use quality optics like Leapold. If your really concerned carry a spare scope. But I have not found the need for that either.
Pat

[Jaywalker]

I hunt rough areas, and though I don't think of myself as a klutz, I must be. Downed trees, streams with loose stones, rocks under leaves, all combine to take me down at least once a season. Sometimes I can protect my firearm as I go down, and sometimes it's all I can do to protect myself and the longarm has to look out for itself.

Under those circumstances, it's illuminating to look at system strengths and weaknesses. Steel barrels/receivers and wood stocks appear pretty strong and safe, though they can be plugged or dented, respectively. An aluminum and glass contraption stuck out in an exposed position? That looks plenty vulnerable to me, and it doesn't much matter whether it's high or low quality - it's still aluminum and glass. I've dropped a rifle on a scope from time to time, and, after that, I'm not sure if it retains its zero. Yes, I have a spare rifle back in the truck, but it took me a long time to get where I fell, and it'll take just as long to get back, and I won't feel comfortable shooting at anything until I'm confident the bullet's going where I want it to. I'd be much happier if I could remove the scope, put it into my pack, and continue hunting with irons.

That's the "hunting" argument, if you will. There's also another "weakest point" argument. I've got, what, $400 in a Leupold VX-III that I don't want to break. The rifle can take a beating and function. My solution (hypothesis only - it's never happened to me) to protect the scope is to use inexpensive aluminum scope bases that will break before the scope or rings. In this case, I don't want strong - I want it to break before something more expensive does.

You can have good aftermarket sights added if you're serious about it. (I don't have any, but New England Custom Gun make some that look pretty nice.) If you want to remove the scope in the field, however, you'll have to ensure you can see the sights over the scope mount, since removing that in the field would be impracticable. Also, you'll need to ensure you have the proper tool to remove the scope, or plan for it by using a slot screw to attach the rings to the mount.

Jaywalker

[444]

Makes you appreciate some of the more recent advances in firearms, like the AR15/M16.
Optic is mounted using a mount that will come right off in seconds without tools.
The iron sights are good iron sights and not just an afterthought.
If the whole thing is put together right, you can use the iron sights with the optic still mounted on the rifle.
The iron sights usually fold out of the way, but can be deployed with the flick of a finger.
And of course, since the industry standard is a common size rail instead of proprietary scope mounts and rings, you can change out optics in seconds with a spare or a different type of optic and have a very very close zero (using an optic you previously zeroed on that weapon).

I don't see why all this stuff wouldn't work on a bolt action. But, it hasn't been done that way for the last 100 years and habits are hard to break. Also, this is hunting (or whatever) and your life usually doesn't depend on your rifle, so people would probably balk at spending the money.

[Art Eatman]

Once I learned of the advantages of a scope over iron sights, there was no turning back. My first centerfire was a 1917 Enfield in .30-'06, given to me by my uncle in the summer of 1950. My father gave me a semi-finished Bishop stock and a Weaver K2.5. This all got put together in 1951.

I've never hurt a scope in all these years, so I'm not gonna start worrying about that at this late date. I've had some "involuntary descents" down some hillsides, and had a rifle or two slip and fall to the floor. My rifles have endured 4WD suspensions and jeep trails for many thousands of miles through the decades. I've been pleasantly surprised at the lack of problems.

An example of the country in which I've hunted is in this thread: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=4367&page=2&pp=25 Post #32.

Plenty of opportunity for things to go wrong, go wrong, go wrong...

:), Art

[longrifleman]

Several years back I went through the same quest, with slightly different criteria. I wanted .30-06 and mag capacity wasn't a big deal. I went with a Rem 700 with factory irons. I mounted see-through rings and can use either sight. Some folks don't like the higher mount due to cheek weld problems, and I can certainly understand. 50 rounds at a target can get rough; one round in the field is nothing.

The quality of the irons is adequate but marginal (Williams style bead). I pretty much set the effective limit for them at 75 yds. Low light is also a problem.

I've never actually shot a critter with the irons, but I personally feel better with a backup system. But, the older I get the less confidence I have in that bead sight. A few more years and I will probably remove the irons and go strictly with a scope due to old eyes. If I pass up a shot because I don't trust the scope, well, age makes that easier to take also.

I have a Williams peep sight on an Argie Mauser I use for a truck gun, so I don't have to worry about a scope getting knocked around. If I was limited to only irons a good peep wouldn't worry me much. It isn't limited to short range but low light is still a problem.

[Bear Gulch]

All of my emergency guns has iron sights on them. Some times I find scopes on rifles humorous or even somewhat dangerous. For example, scoping a 45-70 that you carry for bear defense seems to be more of an impediment than an improvement.

[Reyn]

Remington BDL

[pbhome71]

Yup, the BDL has a model with iron sight. All the youth model, I believe, comes with iron sight, too.

[Lennyjoe]

My hunting rifle (Savage 110 bolt in 30-06) has iron sights on it. Came with Williams adjustable rear sight and hooded front sight. I sighted it in at 100 yards with 165gr factory ammo before putting the scope on. I also have quick detachable scope rings on the Burris scope so I can take it off if necessary in the woods.

[cabbageman]

I bought a remington 270 ,thats not even set up for iron sights, SCOPE ONLY :banghead:

[Bear Gulch]

Some medel have em others don't.

[Cosmoline]

Iron sights are like standard transmission. Yes, automatic trannies and scopes have gotten much better in the past 20 years. But REAL riflemen and REAL drivers will always want a car with a stick shift and a rifle with good iron sights. :D

Seriously, I think it's a bad idea to ignore Elmer Keith's advice to always have backup irons and know how to use them. I also suspect most shooters simply don't realize that good iron sights will get game just as effectively in most hunting situations as scopes.

I agree that most irons on US-made rifles in particular are cheap afterthoughts. Even on otherwise nice Marlins, the irons are made of rough cut sheet metal and have a riser that falls out if the rear sight is lifted. The best irons in current production today are the superlative tangent sights on CZ 452 ZKM .22's. Sadly you can't get them on the 550's, though the 550's have fairly good iron sights as it is. This is one reason I prefer C&R rifles. They knew how to make good iron sights back in the day.

[orangeninja]

I used to shoot competatively in high school. Single shot Anshutz .22 LR with peep sights. The groups you could get with those things was flat out astounding. But it took practice and coaching.

Scopes have a shorter learning curve than iron sights, unless you're a sniper with a spotter and a 1/4 mile shot.

Learn to use the irons and you'll be in rare company. You should see the looks you get taking a 100 yard shot with iron sights on a 30-30 when standing next to a guy with a .308 and a scope the size of a Volkswagen. Guess what? We both hit the target. ;)

Disclaimer: Those of ya'll with the 30-30 know what Kentucky windage means when using irons at 100 yards right?

[MrMurphy]

Marble, Williams, and XS still make good irons.

Wild West Guns's rear aperature/front Williams set is what I'm going to put on my Marlin .44.


Since I've hit a truck sized target at 950+ yards with a Lee-Enfield, with the issue irons, no sling/bipod/rest (sitting position), I am well aware of how good irons can be.

If I bought a modern bolt gun, it'd be the Remington 673 in .308, with a better aperature rear sight.

[Dave R]

My Rem700 misses your criteria by one round. It has a capacity of 4.

It has very nice iron sights. Easy to use, and fine enough to offer some precision.

But you probably already saw that and rejected it.

[Art Eatman]

Well, I've been known to use irons. Garand, GI Carbine, Krag and this old Schutzen.

:), Art

[Third_Rail]

:what:


That's old. Wow.

[Domino]

Are there any others out there, or am I just being too picky?
I think I know just what your looking for. The M10 Rifle (http://www.tristarsportingarms.com/m10rifles.htm) is a brand new Enfield that comes in 7.62X39 and .308 as well as a multitude of configurations. The one in 7.62X39 takes all standard AK magazines and the one in .308 is sold with a 10 round detachable mag, it could be for a FAL or G3 or something. They look really nice, I think they would great survival guns.

[SamlautRanger]

I heard they are not importing the M10? Do you know of a place where you can purchase one of these M10 Enfield Rifles, if indeed they are importing them?

[Domino]

Well, if Tristar (http://www.tristarsportingarms.com/m10rifles.htm) quit imprting them try S.I.A. (http://www.specialinterestarms.com/#Enfield%20K) as they seem to have the one in 7.62X39. I guy over at Glock Talk (http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=362679) got one and seems to really enjoy it. I would love to get one in either caliber.

[orangeninja]

Dang.....that is one COOL looking rifle. Where can I get one?

[Dionysusigma]

That TriStar No.4 Mk.4 looks perfect. :)

FWIW, the main reason that Remington, Winchester, Ruger, Savage, Sako, Tikka, and CZ didn't measure up was because of mag capacity. It seemed that it always came down to the same (rather) dumb choice between irons or decent mag capacity.

The M10 looks almost perfect, except it only takes single-stack AK mags. :scrutiny: No idea why, as even though these are imported rifles the mag capacity restriction only applies to semis... right? :uhoh:

'Sides, the Jungle Carbine was never... uh... aesthetically palatable, IMO. ;)

[No_Brakes23]

Cosmoline said...
Iron sights are like standard transmission. Yes, automatic trannies and scopes have gotten much better in the past 20 years. But REAL riflemen and REAL drivers will always want a car with a stick shift and a rifle with good iron sights.
Hell yeah!

After learning to use iron sites on the A2 out to 500 yards, I gained a lot of respect for them. Plus, I have always had trouble with eye-relief and sight picture on scoped weapons.

[Smoke]

Remington 673.

Bolt action...check
Iron SIghts....check
.308...check.

Smoke

[Mauserguy]

I know what you mean. Most rifles today don't have iron sights, and most of those that do are not very clear to use. When I was last in the market for a sport rifle I really liked the CZ line. I think it is the LUX that comes with a nice stock and fine iron sights. I ended up, though, building up an old rifle.

In my only one hunting experience, I was prepared to take some long shots, having the big old scoped rifle and a laser range finder, but darned it, that deer jumped up out of the brush at my feet. I could barely get my rifle on him with that scope. He nearly got away because my field of vision was so narrow in the glass.

I would have been better off without the scope at all. This next season, I am taking two guns. My primary will be iron sights only, and my backup will have a scope incase all of the shots turn out to be long. Good luck on your quest.
Mauserguy

[pete f]

remington 700 ADL

308'

four plus one

synthetic

bolt

iron sights

about 350 bucks at gander

[BluesBear]

The AIA M10 chambered for 7.62x39 uses standard double stack AK mags.

The AIA No.4 Mk.IV chambered in .308 uses standard M14 magazines.

[Dionysusigma]

According to the SIA site, they're single-stack only:
http://www.specialinterestarms.com/MVC-187E.JPG

Also, from their FAQ:
Why not use the 30 rd. double stack AK mags, or a 100 rd. drum, that would be cool!
That is possible, we built one action with a 30 rd. mag. as an experiment. We were not satisfied with the amount of metal that had to be milled away for the magazine to sit high enough for reliable feeding.
Many states also limit hunters to a 5 rd. magazines, others have bans on magazines holding over ten rounds.
Using 5 or 10 rd. mags saves us from having to keep track of which states allow the mags we want to supply with each gun.

However, a No.4 Mk.1 in 7.62x39mm with a detachable 75-round drum would be my dream SHTF gun! :evil:

Would such a beast be possible? :uhoh:

[thatguy]

The vast majority of hunters want optics and for good reason. Some old geezers still get by with iron sights, and I do like them on my rifle even if I have mounted a scope on it. A lot of new rifles have no sights, some do. You will have to check it out.

Here's my idea of a real rifle. BTW- my car has a manual transmission, too.

http://www.fototime.com/FD9BF6AE7C56D4E/standard.jpg

Here's another real rifle:

http://www.fototime.com/2621A36A2C902A2/standard.jpg

[444]

I like.
Now I am thinking about keeping my eyes open for something like that.

I own plenty of rifles with optics, but I actually do most of my shooting with iron sights. I am big into the milsurps but also do quite a bit of .22 shooting with a receiver sight. I have seen old magazines and books with rifles like the ones you picture and would like to own one. Maybe I ought to just put a receiver sight on one of my own bolt actions.

[BluesBear]

I was just going by what the Lawrence Ordinance (http://www.lawranceordnance.com/new/rifle-m10.html) website said. (bold added)

http://www.lawranceordnance.com/new/images/rifles/m10-magazine.jpg

Features

• Based upon the proven No.4 design, the M10 has been significantly strengthened in order to withstand the higher pressures of many modern cartridges. Improvements have also been made to overcome original shortcomings of the design. These include a deepened and strengthened receiver bolt track negating chipping of the bolt track leads caused by constant disassembly.
• The receiver is CNC milled from 4150 steel.
• Shorter 60 degree bolt throw (versus 90 degree throw on many other commercial rifles)
• The barrels are available in both in 508mm and 410mm
• Removable double stack steel magazine box with 7 or 10 round capacity. The magazines are of a standard military type making the use of higher capacity magazines possible.
• All rifles will be stocked in teak furniture as standard. Though slightly heavier than walnut, teak offers far superior strength.
• 39.3 overall length, 7.2 lbs (20" barrel)
• 35.3 overall length, 6.9 lbs weight (16" barrel)
• Fitted with Mk.2 No.4 style rear sight. Front sights are post type and are adjustable for both elevation and windage.

The ones shown at the 2004 SHOT show were fitted with a double stack magazine.

http://www.lawranceordnance.com/new/images/rifles/m10a3-rifle.jpg

[Hellion Productions]

SIA and AIA are two different animals.

SIA is built on existing actions.

AIA is a new action, probably beefed up to take a double-stack mag.

Best,
John Bear Ross

[rick_reno]

All of my older Sako rifles have iron sights. They're there for backup, so far I haven't had to take a scope off and use them.

[Malamute]

I also find the iron sights provided on most modern rifles pretty dismal. The open "U" notch and bead front aren't easy to shoot well.

I've had several bolt rifles fitted with a Williams "shorty" ramp front sight, and a good receiver peep sight. On the front, I have the ramp both screwed and sweated on. This makes it almost impossible to knock them off, as is possible if only screwed on. I use sourdough type front sight blades (a square blade sight with an angled brass inset in the rear face).

For the receiver sight, I've used mostly older Lyman No 57 sights, they are still available in alloy, but I like the steel ones. After sighting in, I remove the slide, leaving the base on the gun. The best way to stow the slide, is to inlet a space under the buttplate. Otherwise, I make sure I have the slide in my gear when out in the hills. If the scope fails, I always have my swiss army knife and/or Leatherman to be able to remove the scope and get to the sight slide under the buttplate.

I have had a Weaver ring to base screw break, have seen another base fail (a redfield type, one of the windage screws was lost), have seen a couple of scope reticles come loose and lose zero, (one was a Nikon, certainly not a cheap scope). When the reticles come loose, it's not apparent, the gun just simply doesn't hold a zero. Sight it in, and in the sighting in, it simply keeps moving the group around on the target for no apparent reason. You can be WAY off when this happens. A gunsmith has told me he has seen a couple scopes that have had this problem.
I also know a guy that fell and had his rifle not hitting POA (the rear scope bell was bent down), it was a Leupold or Ziess, can't recall which.
Cooper mentions that in most of the rifle classes, they usually have several scope failures in every class. Yes, scopes are much better than in the past, but they still sometimes fail for a number of reasons. I think it's a good idea to have good backup sights on a rifle.

[goon]

Thank you.
I have nothing constructive to add to this thread.
I just wanted to voice my support.

[Raygun]

I have a Remington 700 BDL in .30-06 with iron sights. The catalog says it holds four rounds, but the label on the box it came in says five rounds (maybe that's supposed to mean 4+1). In any case, it does in fact hold five rounds in the magazine, albeit fairly tightly, but it feeds them all just fine.