Do I really have to get a rifle with a scope?

[BC_bush_man]

I was raised on the Speghetti Westerns and such and none of those dudes had scopes on their rifles. (I realize they were not invented yet .

It does seem to me that it would be alot more fun to develop the skills required to handle a rifle like the "real" men of long past fictitious days.

Are there any riflemen out there that are "purists" in that they will not use a scope? Maybe they even have competitions?

Am I seriously deluding myself that I could learn to shoot like "Blondie" and cut the hangman's rope from a far distance in one shot with my trusty scopeless Winchester?

BTW, I am a total gun newbie and have never fired a gun of any kind yet. I'm starting my gun license training tomorrow night.

What rifle would you recommend that is scopeless and would work for "hangman rope" cutting and other targets in say .223 or 308 or some such caliper?

I must admit that I do find the more classic looking lever action rifles attractive. Also, I don't necessarily want the cheapest thing out there. I don't mind paying a little more for something nice. (not thousands more, though)

Or do you really think I am seriously limiting myself in terms of accuracy etc... by wanting a scopeless rifle?

Thanks for any help. Please assume I know very little if you respond.

 

[torpid]

I'd say a levergun in .22lr is a great and inexpensive way to have fun practicing with iron sights while keeping it simple and "pure". You can't go wrong with that- it's really like a serious grown up "cowboy" BB gun.

 

[MisterPX]

If it's any consilation, I don't have scopes on any of my rifles. Granted, they let you become more accurate, but without a foundation (ie, iron sights), that accuracy won't reach it's full potential.

 

[Sam]

Don't know who told you they didn't have scopes back then but that person is wrong. Scopes even saw military use in the Great War of Northern Agression (by damnyanks of course, unsporting dogs that they are).

It may be easier to shoot accuratly with a scope but many people do real well with irons.

Sam

 

[rockstar.esq]

The olympics are still shot iron sighted.

They shoot better'n most of us

Course if they didn't I'd be on TV!

 

[Bridger]

NRA/CMP Highpower rifle is a great iron sight only shooting sport. Shoot from standing, prone, and sitting, from 200 yards out to 1000 yards even with no scopes!

I only have a scope on one rifle, but everything else is iron sights. Plenty of us purists out there!

In fact, it's the best way to start I think. Look around at .22 rifles, Marlin 39A is a current production lever action. I have a Winchester 9422 but they no longer make those, but I love it. Ruger 10/22 is a fun semi-auto.

Get that .22 for all your general practice, shoot often, read up, take classes, shoot in competition, and one day you can shoot that rope down. Well, depending how thick it is and how far away it is and and and...

Welcome to shooting!

 

[mc223]

Iron sights are a wonderful thing for those who still have good eyesight. For those of us that are relagated to glasses and bifocals in particular, just finding the front sight is sometimes a challenge. I use scopes.

 

[Frenchy]

+1 on crappy vision!

 

[LAK]

Do I really have to get a rifle with a scope?

Nope. You may find a scope beneficial if you have less than average vision in your sighting eye.

--------------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[steveracer]

If you MUST get a scope,

let me be the first to recommend something with 1x or 1.25x power. The advantage isn't magnification with scopes in most cases, it's having the crosshair and the target in the same viewing plane.
I learned with irons, specifically aperture sights, but I prefer 1.25x now. I like not having to shift my sight from target to front sight, and back to target after the shot.

 

[1911 guy]

Leverguns and scopes.

First off, no, you do not need a scope to shoot accurately. What you do need, however, is good iron sights. This means a narrow, flat (no ball on the end) front sight. Peep sights work well, too. Personally, I advocate learning the fundamentals before using a scope. I think you're on the right track to want irons on your first rifle.

Now about leverguns. There are some fine ones out there right now, everything from .22 rimfires up to .500 calibers for seriously big and dangerous game. For accuracy and cost of shooting, I'd suggest a .22 rimfire. You can expect (if you do your part) one ragged hole out to about 50 yards from a bench. I've seen very accomplished shooters do it with time and proper form from the offhand position. No high priced stuff, just accurate rifles in good hands.

 

[moewadle]

To BC_bush_man and others

I am really excited about your question and beginning this thread. I have returned to guns 7 months ago after a 20 year lapse. I am age 63 for what that is worth and, to a great extent, a traditionalist and a purist. I have several 22 rifles just recently acquired and I am NOT interested in a scope for some of the same reasons you are. I like the idea of trying on marksmanship without the glass. From my recent reading I have learned that aperture (peep) sights are the way to go. They help the eye to focus much better than do open iron sights. So, I suggest you start learning about non-scope sights, meaning learn all about the principles of aperture/peep sights. You can purchase receiver sights and tang sights for many firearms. Tang sights typically run about $125 for a new one plus whatever a gunsmith would charge to install. I have an almost brand new Henry Golden Boy .22 LR which I love and I am thinking of putting a tang sight on it. Brownells has them for $125 that specifically fit the Golden Boy. I am trying to consider if I want to spend that much money for a sight for a .22 LR or if I want to get a rifle that is accurate to a longer range. In other words, get a rifle with longer-range accuracy if I am going to spend that kind of money for a sight. I was thinking of something that would be pretty darn accurate at 100 yards like a 22 Magnum. In any event I think you are on to something fun. Put a good peep sight on a good small caliber rifle or even a high-velocity varmint rifle and go out there and see what you can do. You do not need to justify it. After all that is what hobbies like cowboy action shooting are all about....preserving and enjoying the traditions of the past. (Even though I do know that scopes pre-date the Civil War.) But I suggest, if you have not yet bought a rifle, to consider something that is not so expensive to shoot but a bit better than a .22 LR. However, I also add you can probably get receiver sights for a common .22 LR model, such as the 10/22 for much less than $125. Moe

 

[NorCalRifleman]

Am I seriously deluding myself that I could learn to shoot like "Blondie" and cut the hangman's rope from a far distance in one shot with my trusty scopeless Winchester?

Don't feel bad if you can't cut a hangman's rope with iron sights. Even Blondie needed a scope.



Oh, and that's a Henry, not a winchester.

Inside reasonable distances, I feel that scopes are a crutch. As long as you've got good eyes and practice enough, you should have no problem taking medium to big game anywhere inside two hundred yards. My seventy year old grandpa is a dead shot at one hundred yards with his .357 mag revolver, no scope.

If you really want to develope your skills as a marksman, get yourself at least a .22 with open sights, whatever type you're most comfortable with, then go plinking. If you really don't think you'll ever be able to get the job done without a scope (after practicing for a while) then you've got your answer.

Whatever you do, I encourage you to keep at least one rifle, even if it is only a .22, with open sights. It's always good to maintain your fundamentals, even if you never get to be as good as Quigly with his peep sighted Sharps rifle. Iron sights and one shot, now that's serious shooting.

 

[dracphelan]

1. Nothing wrong with only ising iron sights. My eyes just don't support it.
2. There are several organizations that have longe range iron sight comptetitions. I believe that they are part of some SASS (Single Action Shooting Society) events. I also think there are some NRA events that do this too.
3. As others have said, you might want to start with a 22. I've yet to see a 22 rifle that didn't have iron sights. After you get safety and technique down, move on up to higher caliber weapons.

 

[Keith Wheeler]

I don't like shooting with a scope. I stick with iron sights on everything I've got, from pistol caliber carbines to my '03A3.

 

[Geno]

Even old eyes

Even old eyes work just fine with "peer sights". One of my most accurate-ever rifles is my Springfield M1A; those national match sights are fun. Given the very lengthy sight plane (almost the entire elngth of the rifle), and the very small hole, it is extremely accurate. Good barrel, trgger and shooter don't hurt it either.

Scope? Forget about it! Many rifles, like lever-actions were NEVER intended to be scoped. That's almost blasphamy! Other rifles are indeed intended for scopes, say varmint rifles, but, there are people who varmint hunt with sights.

In the event you do not have a peer sight, make one for your eye glasses (if you have glasses). If not, buy a pair of very light sunglass, or non-presciption lenses. Take a piece of black electrical tape. Punch a very small, very clean hole through the tape, then, adhere the tape to your lense. Look through the hole, down the sights and at the target. Never before will you have had such a crystal clear, clean and crisp sight and target. It's downright odd. That act clears up almost all vision ailments and improves most shooter's accuracy by seeing the target crystal clear.

Back 21 years ago, I was at the range, and an old-timer (nearly 100 years old at the time) taught me that. He said they used to do that in WWI on the battlefields. For what it's worth, off the benchrest with my M1A "Loaded", I can easily maintain 2" groups at 200 yards either with the National match iron sights. With my 3rd generation 4X16 scope, I am maintaining sub-MOA. But, I do have national match everything parts on that rifle.

In closing, no scope! Be a puriest!

Doc2005

 

[Gewehr98]

We don't need no stinkin' scopes!

Although it doesn't hurt to have some serious sight radius when using non-glass sights.

 

[rangerruck]

I always zero all my weapons with their sites, whether i scope them or not. it is the correct thing to do , to find out how ahd where your natural point of aim is with all your weapons, and where there point of impact is.
Now then, a lever action in almost any cal is quite good, and if you can go to a gunshop or gunshow, find A Savage model 99 , they came in various cals. Also if you can go to the same places and find an old remington 600 or 688 or mohawk, they aslo came in various cals, and were a bolt action. they were very light, very short, came with a 16 to 18 inch bbl. and the coolest ones had a vent rib, that went from the receiver, all the way to the muzzle.

 

[Bwana John]

I love the fact that with firearms you can use a small amount of stored energy, use that to set off a lot of chemical energy, and in turn that is transformed into a large amount of kinetic energy. No batteries, no glass, no bulbs, no lasers, just the pure machine. A perfect illistration to Newton's 2nd law of thermodynamics.


I will scope a rifle for big game hunting farther than 75 yds, I figgure it is the least I can do to ensure a clean kill.

But putting a scope on a lever action is silly.

I also like my MBRs to work after being dropped, glass dosent like this test.

 

[MechAg94]

I grew up shooting Red Ryder BB guns and then single shot .22 LR rifles. Iron sights are something everyone should learn to use effectively, but they do take some practice to get a feel for them.

My Dad is retired and has lost his near vision to a certain extent. He has uses a scope on a 10/22 and a 17HMR that he plays with. He finds he can see well with the scope. The only iron sights he can still use effectively are those on his M14 which has the dog ears on the front sight to help center aperture.

 

[MatthewVanitas]

90% of my rifles are unscoped, and I'm doing fine.

I'll toss in another strong vote for a Marlin 39A: it's a .22 caliber lever-action rifle. Made of solid-steel and walnut, and made by the same company in the same design for over a century. They're usually around US$400 around here.

In .22 caliber (or "calibre" if you prefer) you can shoot hundreds of rounds for a dollar or two, with minimal recoil. If you later get a big lever-action bear gun in .45-70 or the like, all the skills from your .22 lever-rifle will cross over.

IRT sights: if you get the Marlin, and decide that you want to be as accurate as possible with iron sights, instead of scoping, the Marble company makes several iron sight upgrades that are compatible with the Marlin.

That's just my vote, -MV

 

[gila_dog]

I agree with the others that a good .22 is a very good choice for a first rifle. With a .22 you don't have a lot of noise and recoil, and the ammo is cheap. It's perfect for learning the basics of marksmanship. I buy Federal hollow point ammo by the 550 round box at Wal-mart for about $8. That's pretty cheap shooting!

A good lever action rifle like the Marlin 39A or the Henry is a beautiful thing. The thing about rifles is that what turns you on is just as important as all the technical issues. If you love it, you will shoot it a lot and become good with it.

My favorite .22 rifle is an old Reminton Targetmaster, single shot bolt action that I bought years ago from somebody for $20. It really looked like junk. It was a bit rusty and had crappy varnish slapped all over its walnut stock. I stripped all that off, cleaned it up, and put a Williams peep sight on it and a sling, and now it's a real tack driver. It's a great cottontail hunting rifle, and I have taught a bunch of kids to shoot with it.

Welcome and have fun!

 

[ArmedBear]

none of those dudes had scopes on their rifles.

Go back and watch The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

Two words: "Sorry, Shorty."

They did have scopes back then, and the Confederate Sharpshooters used them pretty effectively in battle. The scope was invented in 1848, and this Civil War rifle had one.

That's where General John Sedgwick's famous last words came from: "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance. All right, my man; go to your place." He was taken down by a head shot, immediately afterward.

You don't need a scope on a rifle. However, a modern rifle will hit something you can't see without a scope. So you do need a scope to get the most out of the rifle.

Deer at 75-125 yards? No problem. Small targets or game at 300? That's what a scope's for. A scope also works well in low light, since it magnifies light.

"Need" depends on "purpose."

 

[gila_dog]

I got carried away with the last post and forgot that you originally asked about whether to have a scope or not. Well, to start off I would strongly recommend that you don't. A scope adds complication to the operation of the rifle. Most people learning to use a scope have trouble finding the target in the scope and adjusting themselves to the rifle for proper eye relief. It takes a bit of practice to simply get a good picture thru the scope, and find your target quickly. Learn to use the rifle's iron sights first. Eventually you may want to go with a scope, but don't start off that way. You have plenty of other things to learn first.

The advantages of iron sights are simplicity and ruggedness. For very short range shooting, especially at moving targets, they are much better than scopes because you can simply point the rifle at the target, with both eyes open, use the front sight only, and hit good enough and much quicker than you can with a scope. In this case you are shooting the rifle much like you would a shotgun. It takes practice but that's the fun part of it!

The advantages of scopes are that you can shoot smaller groups at longer ranges. Most serious hunters use them because you can shoot accurately in poor light, such as early morning and late evening, when game like deer and elk are most active. When I find myself within 200 yards of an elk, standing more or less broadside with no brush or branches in the way, the hunt is over. It's now time for a clean kill. I want to pick a spot where my bullet will hit the lungs and squeeze off a shot that will hit within a couple of inches of that spot. I can do that with a good 4X scope. To do that with iron or peep sights, in all light and weather conditions, is questionable, for me at least. I feel that I owe it to the elk to kill it quickly.

 

[dfaugh]

The answer to this, like so many question the answer is "It depends".....

Because of vision problems, I simply can't accurately shoot a rifle without a scope. My buddy is just the opposite, he's really good with a "good" set of iron sights. I can shoot pretty good with the "peep" sights on some of his guns, but not as well as he can. He can also shoot pretty good with the scopes on my rifles, but not as well as I can.

In short, alot comes down to personal preferance, and your abilities with different sighting systems. Try it without a scope first, and if you find you can't shoot accurately enough, consider adding a scope.