Aperture vs. Notch sights

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

StudentOfArms

Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
2
Hello All! I am a new shooter.

The majority of my iron sight shooting has been done using a simple blade and notch. I recently tried an AR15 for the first time. Though I found the aperture sights quick to align and overall accurate, my groups opened up even with the smaller aperture. To my inexperienced eyes and hands it seems as if the aperture leaves you more room for error where as a blade/notch style alignment is more consistant and exact, though slower to align. What am I missing?

Would not a notch style sight be just as effective if the sight radius is the same?

Am I doing something wrong? Exactly how far should my eye be from the rear aperture? Do I just need more practice with the aperture sights?

Its seems aperture style sights are the only ones competition rifle shooters use.

Thank You in advance and sorry if this is a preschool question. I look forward to a long, and question filled, relationship with this forum.:)

SOA
 
Firstly, welcome to the site.

Second, I think because it much easir to align the sight in an aperature sight is much faster that a blade and notch.

When you shooting an aperature your just focusing on the bland in the front and puttin your target on top of it, while with a blade and notch you have to keep the balde between the notch which takes more effort. That might be a reason that alot of military rifles (m-16, M1 garand etc) have them, not for the best accuracy but for quick alignment.
 
Do you have any eyesight problems (astigmatism, macular degeneration, etc.)?

The healthy eye automatically centers the post in the center of an aperture sight, even a large aperture such as a ghost ring. They can be surprisingly accurate. However, an eye that is compromised can have problems (or so I have heard).

You are looking through the aperture and not at it, correct? The rear sight should be fuzzy with your focus on the front sight and target.
 
That might be a reason that alot of military rifles (m-16, M1 garand etc) have them, not for the best accuracy but for quick alignment.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but absolutely not correct.

When pure accuracy is the goal, notch and blade sights can't hold a candle to apertures.

There is a REASON that in EVERY single accuracy oriented rifle discipline around the world (as opposed to speed as the goal), from air rifle to rimfire to Service Rifle to Highpower to 300 meter to Palma..... APERTURE sights are the ONLY sights you see in use.

To my inexperienced eyes and hands it seems as if the aperture leaves you more room for error where as a blade/notch style alignment is more consistant and exact, though slower to align. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Once you have learned the proper use of an aperture rear sight the precision with which the top of the front post naturally aligns with the center of the aperture far exceeds anything you can accomplish with a post and blade. Like any skill, it takes some training and practice to make good with it. You most likely were not that good with the blade and post at first either..... and once you have equal time and practice with it, you will do better with an aperture.

Would not a notch style sight be just as effective if the sight radius is the same?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but NO. Once you move the rear notch close enough to your face to give equal distance between front and rear as an aperture set, a notch is going to blurr out on you..... just as much as a rear aperture would, and widen to the point that the "precision" that you THINK you are getting now by seeing the post closely matched on it's sides by the notch is going to disappear. YOu will basically have a square notch aperture with no top on it..... and that leaves your brain with no natural ability to center the front post because it's lost it's vertical referrence point.

When shooting a rear aperture sight the #1 KEY to success is to learn to FOCUS ON THE FRONT SIGHT exclusively. The rear aperture blurs out to a fuzzy ring. The target will be blurry. This is the way it is supposed to be.

It would be ideal if the human eye would allow us to focus on two objects (or three objects) at differing distances at the same time, but it cannot. It can ONLY focus on a single distance plane at a time. With aperture sights the best compromise to take most advantage of the alignment properties inherent in the system are to focus ONLY on the front sight.

The accuracy inherent in this system is amazing to somebody not exposed to it before. For the last 7 years I've been shooting NRA and CMP Highpower. At 600 yards the MR target used has a 10 ring of 12" diameter. That's 2.0 MOA. The X ring in the center is 6" in diameter.... 1.0 MOA.

If at any point more than 7 years ago somebody had told me that I (or anybody else for that matter) could lay down with an iron sighted rifle and score in the 194 to 196 range (out of 200 pts... 20 shots) and with between 5 and 10 X's.... I'd have called them a Liar to their face.

Well, I've done just that....... several times in the last 2 years..... and I'm only an Expert. Given good conditions Service Rifle Master and High Master class shooters frequently shoot near perfect to perfect scores at 600 with very high X counts.

Please note that all of my previous remarks pertain to a rear aperture and front post sight such as is found on US Service Rifles... '03-A3 Spfld, M1 rifle, M14, and M16-AR15. When using both front AND rear apertures, such as found on many purely Match style rifles, the accuracy inherent becomes truly mind boggling. When using these sights the focus point can be extended to the target, not necessarily the front sight.... but when using a post front sight the focus point MUST, MUST, MUST be the front post or you will induce a visual inconsistency that will cause off center shots.

Just my thoughts,
Swampy

Garands forever
 
Last edited:
The majority of my iron sight shooting has been done using a simple blade and notch. I recently tried an AR15 for the first time. Though I found the aperture sights quick to align and overall accurate, my groups opened up even with the smaller aperture. To my inexperienced eyes and hands it seems as if the aperture leaves you more room for error where as a blade/notch style alignment is more consistent and exact, though slower to align. What am I missing?
Click to expand...
Practice. It's a different method and you have to relax and let it work for you. The biggest problem most folks have is they try too hard to consciously get the post centered. Focus on the front sight and almost ignore the rear aperture. After a little while it will just "come to you" like riding a bike.


The healthy eye automatically centers the post in the center of an aperture sight, even a large aperture such as a ghost ring. They can be surprisingly accurate. However, an eye that is compromised can have problems (or so I have heard).
Click to expand...
I have astigmatism. I actually found that I can shoot arperture sights much more accurately. I have a very difficult time getting a post centered in notch sights. I cannot see the rear sight blade when I focus in the front sight.
 
I've replaced the semi-buckhorn sights on my lever guns with XS Ghost Ring aperture sights and I am now very pleased with the results. At first I became frustrated because I didn't put faith in the design. Once you learn to focus exclusively on the front sight and allow the ring to become a blur your results will improve dramatically. You really need to let your eye/brain center the front sight in the ring automatically and not try to do it consciously.
 
How old are you......

you will find that with age, your appreciation for apature sights will improve.....chris3
 
OK as I understand it there are a couple of different kinds of sights where you look through a hole in the rear sight.

The kind the completive shooters use is a fairly large disk with a very small pinhole, that is kept very close to the eye (<1 inch.) These are sometimes called target disks or diopter sights (maybe something else?) The disk blocks the entire field of vision, and if you move your eye even slightly from the correct sighting location, you can’t see the front sight. These sights are extremely precise but not very fast for acquiring the target, and you can only see a small part of the target. A couple of examples:

Rear_aperture_sight.jpg


300px-Long_range_tang_sight.png




Another type are ghost ring or peep sights, where the rear sight is a ring or tube with a much larger opening to sight through. These sights are generally mounted a couple of inches from the eye position. To aim the shooter has to line the front sight up with the middle of the hole. In ghost ring sights the rear sight blurs out of focus (“ghosts”) when properly lined up. These sights allow for much quicker target acquisition, allow you to see more of the target, but are less precise them target disks. A few examples:

highresimage


800px-Aperture_depth_of_field.jpg


For more info see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_sights
http://www.chuckhawks.com/choosing_sights.htm
http://www.gospelplow.net/abasr.html

(I’m sure I made a few mistakes in the above, and I’m they will be quickly corrected in the following posts.)
 
Last edited:
OK as I understand it there are a couple of different kinds of sights where you look through a hole in the rear sight.
Click to expand...

Not sure where you are going with this..... ALL rear aperture / front post sights, regardless of the size of the aperture, are used the same way. Some may be more applicable to target shooting, others to game hunting, based on the size of the field of view.

They are still used the same way no matter how you slice the pie.

Unless there was a point there that I missed, that's the way I see it.

Best,
Swampy

Garands forever
 
The rule of thumb with an AR15 is "Nose TO The Charging Handle!" You really can not get too close. If you remember this you will get a consistent cheek weld on the stock which is much desired.
If your groups opened up when you went to the AR I would look closely at the gun. Did the gun you were shooting previously have a really good trigger or did whatever AR you were shooting have a really bad one? I ask this because usually when someone goes from almost any other centerfire with open sights to an AR with the stock aperture sights the groups get better.
What stock did this AR have? I find I generally do not shoot the adjustable or aftermarket sights but when I grab up a standard A2 fixed stock everything just falls into place for me.
I have crummy 53 year old eyes and some of the shorter AR's are a struggle for me to shoot but the several extra inches of sight radius in the 20inch rifle is a dream to shoot.
Some new to the AR shooters will develop a flinch to the sharp report (this would also be worse with carbines), I sugest foam plugs under good earmuffs.
Don't give up on the apeture sights or the AR just yet,I believe with a couple of simple adjustments we will give you a case of the dreaded Black Rifle Disease that many of us have fell for.
I have long believed that one of the basic reasons that the Garand is so revered (by myself along with many others) is the great aperture sights found thereon.
 
OHHHHHH O.K.!

Thank You all SOOOO much. I now know what I was doing wrong; too far from and too much focus on the rear sight. Perhaps being the incorrect distance from the sight is why I was having such a hard time "ignoring" it.

I feel so much better now about aperture sights, I can not wait until this weekend when he brings the rifle back over. I would say 90% of my past shooting has been done with a Winchester 94, Remington 700, and Glock 19. The AR 15 is a new dimension for me (and him as well).

NHSport

I have not made a solid decision about AR rifles, I am about 50/50 with it so far. His rifle is a Bushmaster M4 with a collapsible stock. To be honest, I was expecting a better trigger and reliability than what we experienced. Perhaps his rifle is a fluke or maybe it needs breaking in but there were 2 failures to eject and I did not care for the trigger. It was heavy and did not have a clean break.

I will give the rifle another try, still with an open mind, this weekend. I will keep everything I've read here in mind. Thank You all! (plenty more in the future).

:)

SOA
 
Unless there was a point there that I missed...
Click to expand...
Point? I’m supposed to have a point? Oh yeah, the question that started this thread:
Would not a notch style sight be just as effective if the sight radius is the same?
Click to expand...
I guess I’m saying notch sights may be more effective then aperture sights, depending on what you mean by “effective” and what type of aperture sight you are comparing the notch sight to.
 
ALL rear aperture / front post sights, regardless of the size of the aperture, are used the same way.
Click to expand...
This is not strictly true. A true peep sight, with a small aperture, has a different optical effect than the ghost ring. With a tight peep sight, the light waves eminate in a radius from the peep, in effect enlarging the picture slightly, and allowing you more precision. With a ghost ring, there is no such (discernible) effect, and you are merely bracketing the front post. You need to be pretty close to a peep sight, but the distance from the ghost ring is less important.

Needless to say, peeps are much more accurate, but you lose some (or quite a bit) of the sight picture. Shotguns use ghost rings because it is important to be able to see the target, and around it, while it is moving. Those 1000 yard .45-70 shooters use peep sights for the precision.

I have a model 94 30-30 with an XO ghost ring that is threaded for a Williams peep sight (XO sold them that way for a while). With the peep sight in the hole, the groups are less than half the size they are with the peep out and using just the ghost ring.

However, the post should be centered the same way in all of them, and they all tend to be better than the rear leaf sight.
 
LaEscopeta ~

Is the first picture in the post one you took, or one you found somewhere?

pax
 
ALL rear aperture / front post sights, regardless of the size of the aperture, are used the same way.
Click to expand...

However, the post should be centered the same way in all of them, and they all tend to be better than the rear leaf sight.
Click to expand...

I think you just made my whole point for me.......

Best to all,
Swampy

Garands forever
 
I have not made a solid decision about AR rifles, I am about 50/50 with it so far. His rifle is a Bushmaster M4 with a collapsible stock. To be honest, I was expecting a better trigger and reliability than what we experienced. Perhaps his rifle is a fluke or maybe it needs breaking in but there were 2 failures to eject and I did not care for the trigger. It was heavy and did not have a clean break.
Click to expand...
Concerning accuracy, the M4 type collapsible stock isn't the best way to go. A simple fixed stock or one of the better quality aftermarket custom collapsible stocks will give you a much better cheek weld and be easier to shoot accurately.

I've never owned a Bushmaster lower, but from the one's I've fondled in gun stores, the ones I've shot and the comments I've heard, they don't have the best triggers on the market. I'd highly recomend upgrading to an RRA NM (National Match) or other aftermarket trigger. I've put an RRA NM on every AR I own.

Concerning reliability, field strip it (including disassembling the bolt) and give it a good cleaning. These things usually come packed in a light grease that protects it for storage but is a bit gummy for shooting. After that, run about 300 rounds through it keeping it well lubed (run it wet), then detail clean it very well again. That should break it in. If you still have problems, then call Bushmaster, but I doubt you will.
 
I'd think a peep sight on an AK would be kind of funny personally.

Mike Venutrino (sp) recently wrote and article in "Guns" magazine about BCPR peep sights and how to use them.

Jeff Cooper opined that the size of a ghost ring didn't have much effect on accuracy, certainly not in quick shots. He wrote about that in "The Art of the Rifle".

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the tang mounted peep style aperture sights require a tremendous amount of vertical adjustment when used on rifles with long barrels at differing ranges. Whereas the folding leaf arrangements common on dangerous game rifles have very little differences in height between ranges.

One other point I've learned the hard way is that the ghost ring effect seems to get minimized when the ring is farther from the eye. One egregious example are ghost rings for handguns. The rear sight never becomes a "fuzzy ring" when looking through it. Instead it makes for a sight picture that blocks out a lot of the target. I have seen some examples where the front sight is of the "globe" type which is a whole nother ball o wax as they say.
 
Mojo sights. They seemed to provide dramatically better accuracy on my cheap WASR than I hear those AKs are capable of. ;)

John
 
Jeff Cooper opined that the size of a ghost ring didn't have much effect on accuracy, certainly not in quick shots. He wrote about that in "The Art of the Rifle".
Click to expand...
Yeah, he was wrong about that. Not about anything else, ever. But that one thing he was wrong about.

And there are plenty of Ak rifles that come with a peep sight. The Valmet and Galil are two, plus all the custom guns. With a tight dustcover, they are absolutely the way to go. Not only do they make accurate shooting easier, but it increases the sight radius by 70-80%.
 
Hello I have Looking for a set Of rear Sight Inserts for my Bushmaster Ar 15
Looking for.4o-50 any soures?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
AR sight?
Replies
4
Views
503
Pony Express
P
G
  • Locked
Some points in favor of non-aperture sights.
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
nv665
N
K
  • Locked
Sight Alignment Heresy
Replies
20
Views
3K
ks_shooter
K
P
  • Locked
Aperture front sight
Replies
3
Views
508
Vern Humphrey
V
R
  • Locked
Daniel Defense A1.5 Rear Aperture Problem
Replies
15
Views
3K
Z-Michigan
Z
Back
Top