Educate me on peep sights.

[rocinante]

I have a 10/22 and I hate the stock sights on it. I am told if you get use to them peep sights are great. My problem with all iron sights is my eyes are not what they use to be and up close items tend to be blurry. Given that folks have recommended peep because you focus on just the front post? Seems like peep sights would obscure the target a lot.

These are the sights I am looking at. They are attractive because appleseed recommends them and they are similar to what are used on american military rifles. Is it possible to get a fiber optic front post?

http://www.tech-sights.com/ruger3.htm

Talk me into these sights for my own good. My cheap bone is acting up so I need encouragement. I don't want to put a scope on a 22.

 

[NickEllis]

I swapped my 10/22 sights for Techsites, and have never looked back. Its a perfect training tool for my m1a. If you prefer a pistol grip, then get another stock for the 10/22.

Just do it, you won't regret the decision. Oh, and an extended mag release would help as well.

 

[vzenmn]

Best money I ever spent on a 10/22 besides ammo. I got the tsr200 and wish I just got the 100 instead though. Don't really need it.

 

[funfaler]

The rear sight will be "fuzzy" while the front sight post needs to be crystal clear and crisp, then your target will be "fuzzy" as well. That is the correct set up.

The peep is close enough to your eye as to not obsure the target and your eye will naturally want to center the front sight within the aperature.

There is no doubt that the Tech-Sights are a great improvement over the standard Ruger 10/22 sights, and they are great for Appleseed and any training that you want to cross over to military pattern rifles.

Let me tell you that if you get them and don't like them, there is a big market for them over on the Appleseedinfo forum, so you could get most of your $$ out of them.

Good luck.

 

[rocinante]

okay twist my arm I will do it. I think I will buy the TSR100 and the TS220 so for five bucks more I can try both.

Gaiudo I put an extended mag release and a bolt release in the rifle already. Also mulling getting the tapco pistol grip stock partly because it is adjustable to a wider range of me and my family and friends. Man I got a talent for turning inexpensive firearms into something different.

 

[funfaler]

My 2c.

The -100s is the way to go. The -200, even though they have rear elevation adjustment, don't have enough adjustment for a 25 meter zero. Tech-sight is aware of the issue and is currently looking for a taller front sight for that model.

The -100s have the same diameter aperature hole on both of the "flip aperature". So unlike A1 sights, with one large hole and one small, this one has two small. There is about an 8 moa change in elevation with the flip, on a carbine 10/22, be a little less on the "rifle length".

Good luck

 

[cornman]

I could never understand how peep sites could be as accurate as notched sight. Are they? Why dont hunting rifles have them as standard equipment from the factory then?

 

[dmazur]

cornman -

With practice, they are generally faster than a notched sight. The "centering" effect mentioned occurs in two axes without obscuring the front sight. With a notched sight, the shooter can obscure the front sight with the rear and have to "find" it.

IMO, they aren't provided by the factory on hunting rifles for two reasons:

1) Scopes are more reliable and the trend is away from iron sights of any kind as standard equipment.

2) Peep sights interfere with scope mounting.

So, for the few manufacturers still offering them on hunting rifles, iron sights satisfy the traditional need for a backup sight without interfering with the scope.

(BTW, I have a peep sight that fits on a Weaver rail as a backup for the scope on my Ruger .44 carbine...)

 

[moewadle]

To add to that

information about why peep sights are not provided....not only because the trend is to scopes but because of the cost. Even an inexpensive peep sight costs quite a bit more than open sights. So, if the trend today is to scopes and that is what a shooter may put on the gun then a gun maker has little or no reason to spend more on making a gun by putting on peep sights that will increase the retail cost that a shooter may likely take off and throw in a drawer so he or she can put a scope on it. However, if you read the literature you will find that peep sights are much better for accuracy than open sights.

 

[jrfoxx]

The peep is close enough to your eye as to not obsure the target and your eye will naturally want to center the front sight within the aperature.

Yup.For me at least, when using a peep, I don't even really realize there IS any rear sight.Its not like you really get the sense that you are looking thru a hole at all.It just causes your brain to want focus on the front sight, as there doesn't appear to be a rear one to interfere, while also causing your brain to "need" to center the front post.When I was 13-17, I used to shoot .22lr competition at the local gun club, and all the guns had peep sights. The first time I saw one I was like "how the HECK can you hit ANYTHING with this? Theres no way to tell if your aiming too much right, left, up, or down?". Well, they gave me a quick explanation and said to just try it.It works just like they say, and is VERY accurate. We had a contest once where from 50ft, they hung 5 mothballs from string all in a line. We shot standing position, and the winner was whoever hit the most, or all 5 first, in 1 minutes.I got 4, and nicked the 5th.May not seem like much, but a mothball is pretty small, even at 50ft, and as soon as yo hit the first one, its blows up and starts the other ones swinging.So, that should tell you how accurate peep sights can be, how natural they really are to use, and how fast you can acquire a target with them too. You gotta be pretty quick to hit a moving mothball.....

And I was far from the best shooter in the group (I just had really quick reflexes, which is how I think I did better at the moving mothballs.) Still got the trophy for that, as well as my NRA medals from that at my parents house somewhere I think.

 

[Swampy]

I could never understand how peep sites could be as accurate as notched sight. Are they? Why dont hunting rifles have them as standard equipment from the factory then?

You are asking the wrong question here, Bud.....

Turn it around.... ask instead, "Why don't target shooters use a notch and post?"

Go to ANY rifle target shooting event just about ANYWHERE where precise accurate shooting is the desired result and you will not find ANY shooter using notch and post if the event allows a choice. Every rifle on the line will have some form of aperture sights on it. This is true of NRA Highpower, Palma, International, airgun, rimfire, etc......

Also, the US Military made the decision way back in the early 20th Century that aperture rear sight was much more accurate and user friendly than a notch. The '03 Springfield started out with a notch rear tangeant sight.... but it had a flip up aperture for precise distance shooting. The newer model '03-A3 did away with the tangeant notch entirely and put a rear aperture on the back end of the receiver. All subsequent US military arms have had a rear aperture sighting system.... M1 rifle, M1 carbine, M14 rifle, M16......

Now... your original question..... The answer is... "tradition and cost". American sporting rifle manufacturers have always played to the cheapest common denominator. Notch and post are the cheapest way to put sights on a rifle and..... the tradition part, "that's what has always been put on American sporting rifles, so that's what we are putting on ours".

Just my 2 bits,
Swampy

Garands forever