Ohio handgun hunters

[Parke1]

Ok folks, here's the dilemma.

After a couple deer seasons spent dragging my 870 through the woods, I've decided that I want to hunt with a handgun from now on. I went out and purchased a lovely S&W 629 with a 6 inch barrel. It had a scope mount on it, but I promptly placed iron sights back on it, since I'm used to shooting with iron sights, and I'm very comfortable with them.

Here's where the dilemma sets in. I have a perfectly good pistol scope that I could mount on this Smith. I've never been a scope guy, though. I've never used one on handguns, and I can't really see the need for it, although everyone I talk to seems to think that a scope is a requirement for a hunting revolver.

Bear in mind that I hunt in heavily wooded areas, and I can't imagine taking a shot of more than 75 yards.

So what're your thoughts on this? Should I stick with the iron sights that I'm used to, or should I throw the scope on there? I know which way I'm leaning, but I just thought I'd try to be unbiased and let others give me some suggestions.

Thanks!
-Parke1

 

[redneck]

This is something I've been thinking about too, be interesting to see what folks have to say
Some observations I've come up with so far is that,
1. Rifles point more naturally than handguns. When I swing my rifle up and press my cheek to it, I'm pretty much looking right across the sights.
2. To get fast sighting on a handgun, you generally have to go with big combat sights.
3. Big combat sights don't necessarily offer the same distance accuracy as finer forms of iron sights.

So to get the same accuracy from iron sights on a handgun it seems like you lose a little bit of fast handling, which may or may not be too big of an issue depending on the way you like to hunt.
A handgun scope on the other hand seems like it will get you a little faster sight picture since its bigger and you don't have as much lining up to do, while still keeping some precision.

I guess the thing to do is to try em both and see what your most comfortable with at the range, shooting from different positions like you might have to in the field. Easy enough to do since you've got the base and scope. I still don't know what I would go with personally. Probably won't have to worry about it for awhile though.

 

[formerflyer]

I've hunted on and off with revolvers for about 25 years now, and might be able to give you a bit of help up on the learning curve.

Iron sights (patridge style) can be accurate out past your 75 yard mark, given sufficient practice. The greatest distance you can put 2 cylinders full of your hunting ammo into a paper plate is your maximum distance. In my youth with an 8" Dan Wesson .44 and a good rest that was 125 yards for me. Today with a 5.5" Redhawk that's about 60 yards, 40 yards with my 4" 629, 30 yards with my 5.5" Vaquero (the lock-time on the Vaquero is too long for me).

Standard pistol scopes can increase that range quite a bit. My 8" 629 Custom Shop w/ a 2x Leupold can hold that group all the way to 150 yards. Scopes with standard reticles will will dramatically increase the amount of time it takes to get your gun on target, unless you practice with them CONSTANTLY. It can take a tremendous amount of hunting around behind your revolver to find the exit pupil, and you won't have any clue where it is. When you hold up the gun, you will see NOTHING until you find it, and I've seen more than one experienced hunter wiggling the muzzle around trying to find the darned thing. The cure here is lots of practice indexing the gun from the holster, so that when you bring it up to a shooting position it is already aligned to your eye. This is not simple and takes quite a bit of repetition to master, and is a very perishable skill.

Aimpoint-style zero magnification scopes can drastically improve your acquisition speed and your accuracy, which is why you see competition speed shooters using them. They are the best of both worlds when it comes to hitting with your handgun. Do not be misled by their lack of magnification, as you won't need it for deer hunting. Magnification mostly helps you see better, not hit better. If you can see the target without magnification, you won't lose much precision by using a dot scope. I've shot one inch groups at 50 yards with these things. They really work. One drawback: they run on batteries, and batteries and electronics have a nasty habit of dying when you need them most. After a few unfortunate incidents using them in the past, I refuse to rely on any electronic equipment that's not absolutely necessary, so I don't use them at all any more.

Combat sights (AO/XS type big dots with shallow "V" rears) are simply not necessary for hunting. They are faster, true, but they are for emergency rescue equipment (such as sidearms in bear country). There is no need for that kind of milli-second speed in a hunting firearm. You can learn to shoot very accurately with them, but it's quite a strenuous effort and struggle for most of us. Although if you've been privileged to watch Ashley Emerson use one on a 4" revolver to shoot a wild hog at 70 yards after a blindingly fast draw from his field holster, you'll be convinced it can be done. Of course, most of us don't shoot as well as he does. Maybe none of us does.

For my two cents worth, I'd say use the irons if you can hit your target at distances you are willing to limit yourself too. If you can't get satisfactory results with the factory irons, then mount up the scope and go for it.

 

[LHB1]

I have been hunting with S&W M629 Classic revolvers, 6.5 inch barrel, and 2X scope for several years. Have taken two deer and two hogs. With young eyes you may be able to use open sights for hunting. After six and a half decades, my eyes can't see the sights AND a camouflaged game animal clearly at the same time. For me the ONLY solution is to use a scope which puts the target AND the crosshairs in the same focal plane where both are sharp at the same time. Scopes may not be as fast as open sights but one of the hogs was killed with one shot while running thru brush. Also made a one shot kill on coyote running away from me at 95 yards. The scope is much more precise for me. YMMV.
My scoped M629's are sighted in at 75 yards using a sitting two hand hold and a simple rest that I made. Five shot sighting groups routinely are smaller than the palm of my hand.

Good shooting and be safe.
LB

 

[kjaniak]

"Standard pistol scopes can increase that range quite a bit. My 8" 629 Custom Shop w/ a 2x Leupold can hold that group all the way to 150 yards. Scopes with standard reticles will will dramatically increase the amount of time it takes to get your gun on target, unless you practice with them CONSTANTLY. It can take a tremendous amount of hunting around behind your revolver to find the exit pupil, and you won't have any clue where it is. When you hold up the gun, you will see NOTHING until you find it, and I've seen more than one experienced hunter wiggling the muzzle around trying to find the darned thing. The cure here is lots of practice indexing the gun from the holster, so that when you bring it up to a shooting position it is already aligned to your eye. This is not simple and takes quite a bit of repetition to master, and is a very perishable skill."


This is the number one reason the people that deer hunt with me that use a pistol, hunt with a pro point, aimpoint, or some type of red dot with zero magnification. This is a great point and one to seriously think about.

 

[OH25shooter]

I'll make it simple. Are you young? Good eyesight? Not shooting at a long distance? Then learn to use the iron sights. Practice. It's fun. Why? Because before you know it, you'll be in your 40's and your eyesight will change overnight. Then you begin to scope ALL your guns.

 

[Wags]

I use a S&W Mod 29 8 3/8" barrel and iron sights. Don't get me wrong I like scopes, but if something goes wrong in the field with the scope your SOL. Stick with the basics, marksmanship, breathing, trigger pull.

 

[crawfish]

I have been a handgun only hunter since 1989. Use revolvers and single shot handguns to hunt everything from 1 pound gray squirrels to 2000+ pound feral cattle. As an above poster so aptly put it “old eyes need glass to stay in the game†and my eyes were old when I was 15. For me scopes are what allow me to see game to shoot. The need for magnification in my case really isn’t an issue since I have from the outset of my foray into handgun hunting limited myself to archery ranges of 30 yards or less. I can’t tell you how many times I have been is the situation of being very close to a game animal that I just couldn’t get a clear picture of with my naked eyes but that red dot sight or low power (I have 0X, 1X, 1.5X, 2X and a few 2-7X scopes mounted) scope just made them pop out of the background clutter and darkness, just like magic. This has happened more with dark colored hogs in heavy wooded areas in the early morning than with anything else. IMHO I don’t think there is anything faster sighting than a quality 0X red dot sight except a laser, which I don’t think, is legal to use in a hunting situation in any state.

 

[Revival]

It all depends on your ability.

I prefer scope.

 

[SemperFi83]

I am from Ohio and I would think that for deer, a pistol scope is probably OK. I mainly hunt pigs with my 5" 629 Classic, and there is NO WAY I want a scope on it for pigs.