Express vs Aperture
JShirley
August 14, 2003, 09:38 PM
One day...perhaps in the far distant future, I will build a dangerous game rifle. I plan on having one built on a 1917 action, and chambered in either .416 Rigby or .458 Lott. Barrel length will probably be 24", and I may have a scope rail.
My best friend says that express sights are the only way to go on such a "heavy". Personally, I like "ghost ring" aperture sights. I use them well, I'm used to having them on my defensive armory, and I find them quickly under stress.
In the June, 2002, American Rifleman ("P.H. Big Bores"), Joe Coogan writes
With a large opening referred to as a ghost ring, the aperture sight is possibly the fastest close-quarters sight of all.
What says the crowd?
John
If you enjoyed reading about "Express vs Aperture" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join
TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Preacherman
August 14, 2003, 09:44 PM
Most of the African rifles I've seen (and all of the great British doubles) have used the Express sight setup. I've often seen warthog or hippo ivory used for the front bead, as it doesn't discolor over time. These sights are very fast for up-close-and-personal, halitosis-range stuff.
I've used ghost rings since I came to the USA in 1997. I find them fast and easy to use: but, perhaps because of earlier experience in Africa, I still think that for real hairy close-encounters-of-the-tooth-and-claw-kind, I'd prefer the Express setup.
I haven't had as many of the hairy situations as have others, but when I did have them, I had Express sights on my rifle about half the time. I was noticeably faster and "minute-of-threat" accurate with those sights than with conventional sights.
Andrew Wyatt
August 14, 2003, 09:51 PM
if the rifle fits you properly (see the shotgun fitting threads Dave's authored for more details), then the sight type is largely immaterial, since the front sight will line up properly as you mount.
JShirley
August 14, 2003, 11:21 PM
Ah. Good answer.
4v50 Gary
August 15, 2003, 12:06 AM
Mebbe not. As eyes change, what was good today, may have to be moved further towards the muzzle tomorrow. You see that in some old blackpowder long rifles. I suspect aperture works the same all the time but I need to find an old timer to confirm this. Enybuddy wanna fess up?
Art Eatman
August 15, 2003, 08:56 AM
The only aperture sights I've used have been target-type, so I'm just speculating.
"It seems to me" that the express sights allow you to maintain a "big picture" view of the situation throughout the process of present-and-fire. For the close-range deal envisioned here, it seems to me the express sights make (allow?) you perform in an IPSC or IDPA manner. In this case, a proper fit of the gun's stock makes the stock itself act as the rear sight.
But, conjecture and speculation...
I'd believe that the ghost ring sight would allow better accuracy at longer ranges. Longer sight radius, for one thing.
Art
Slingster
August 15, 2003, 10:34 AM
Art:
The ghost ring aperture sight is conceptually and operationally different from target-style aperture sights. Instead of a large flat disk with a small hole like a target sight, it has a large hole (arond 0.25" in diameter) with thin ring around it. As the name implies, when the gun is brought to bear, the thin ring "ghosts out" because it's too close to your eye to focus on, and all you can really see is the front sight (typically a rectangular post with a fine gold or blaze orange vertical line in the center of its rear face). It therefore occludes your target probably the least of any rear sight.
Art Eatman
August 15, 2003, 11:27 AM
:) I'm aware of the Ghost Ring sights and have no argument with Cooper's reasoning; I've just not had occasion to use them.
I guess I'm sorta focussing on how dangerous game at close range gets you into sort of a shotgunning situation, where indeed the stock fit controls how one shoots accurately.
Again in the "it seems to me" department, I'd think that a sight out on the barrel would come later into one's view (for equal speed in shouldering one's rifle) than a sight at the rear of the receiver--which ties back to my "big picture" comment.
If one is trained in the use of a Ghost Ring sight and is comfortable with it, I'd surely recommend staying with that system rather than make any change.
I got bitten and run over by a horse, and I once had to use a piece of pipe on a crazy old cow, but I've never had to deal with a critter I'd call really "serious". :D
Art
BigG
August 15, 2003, 11:39 AM
I agree with Andrew Wyatt: gun fit will cure a lot of sins in the area of sight alignment, but I agree with Preacherman that the shallow vee express sight with large front bead is easier to pick up when conditions may not be the most favorable. My experience = 0 close encounters of the dangerous kind. Quite a few heavy rifle firings ~ 375 Magnum and Up.
Mannlicher
August 15, 2003, 09:39 PM
this old guy recommends Ashley Outdoors sights
Oleg Volk
August 16, 2003, 02:31 AM
When shotgunning, I noticed that rifle express sights were fast AND accurate on clays, ghost rings were slow and accurate and beads were just fast. Guess I'd go for express sights for nasty critters.
If you enjoyed reading about "Express vs Aperture" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join
TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.