Took it to a local indoor range today - it was about 40F and winds steady at 20+mph outside and being inside just sounded better. The indoor range only goes out to 25yds, but that was enought to get things sighted in and get in some basic practice. The Norinko SKS that I've mounted the TechSight on is stock except for having an aftermarket gas tube, having previously lost its bayonet lug to a grinder, and having a (new) Williams FireSight front insert added to complement the new rear TechSight. This rifle's intended purpose, by the way, is for hunting feral pig and small deer - critters that just don't rate the 7x57 or 303R.
I took along 80 rounds of Wolf HP and 20 rounds of Barnaul SP's. I burned thru the Wolf pretty quickly, and determined that the Firesight is so tall relative to the TechSight rear sight that the rifle shoots 3" low at 25yrds using the 200yd aperture. (Given a zero set for 200 yards and a sight plane that's about 1 1/2" above the bore, I'd expect the rifle to shoot 3" high at 100 yards and not much below POA at 25yrds.) It would be nice to have some form of elevation adjustment at the rear, other than flipping to the 300yrd aperture - only time will tell if this proves to be an issue....
It was easy to acquire the target, and with the Barnaul's I could easily keep a 1" group off a sandbag rest. (That's as good as this rifle will do @ 25 yrds with Barnaul ammo using a scope and mechanical clamp rest). I didn't have any of my hunting loads made up, so this really wasn't intended to be an accuracy test. I just wanted to verify that I could be as accurate with this rifle using the TechSight as I was with the scope that I had previously mounted on it.
That's what I know so far. I'm going to put the OEM front sight post back in and hit the 100yrd range this weekend to see what happens. I'm actually a little worried that the rear sight doesn't have enough intrinsic elevation to allow me to see over the old rear sight easily when I start using the heavier/slower loads that tend to group low anyway. Only time will tell how it works out. It would be relatively easier to use a taller rear aperture, but then the ears on the sight mount would be too short to fully protect it.
But I suspect that I'm picking nits at this point without a lot of emperical data - this sight is worlds better than anything else I've tried on the SKS (and I've tried 'em all).