scope on a 22 necessary?

[Michael R.]

hello,
i have a question about scopes on a 22. are they really necessary or is it better to learn the basics with iron sights? i always feel scopes on a 22 are worthless. i just want your guys opinions.

 

[hardluk1]

Depends on if your a newbe or well seasoned and the intended purpose. Learn the basics with iron sights. At 55 I have 1 with peep sites, a 511P rem. and others have scopes.

 

[Jeff F]

Depends on what your trying to shoot. Pop cans at 25 yards are fun with iron sights. Aspirin tablets at 75 or 100 yards is going to call for a quality scope of high magnification.

 

[TonyAngel]

Although I'm a big fan of magnified and non magnified optics, I do believe that EVERYONE that shoots should, at least, have a basic knowledge and skill in the use of open sights.

Besides, if you are just plinking at close range, a magnified optic is more of a hinderance than anything else. For targets the size of clay pigeons and such, out to 100 yards or so, a 4X scope is more than enough. My target rifle has a 24X scope on it.

 

[ForumSurfer]

are they really necessary

No

s it better to learn the basics with iron sights?

IMHO, yes.

i always feel scopes on a 22 are worthless.

I find this to be untrue.

If you're shooting for the best accuracy you can get a scope can't be beat

What he said.


I prefer to learn on irons, though. Actually, I prefer irons period. Most everything I own has a set of upgraded iron sights on it. You learn quit a bit about marksmanship with good old fashioned irons and peep sights. My eyes aren't what they used to be. At 100 yards and farther, I need a scope to make precise shots. That being said, I know folks that use red dots or scopes on everything except defensive pistols and they're happy with what they do. Whatever floats your boat and keeps you a happy shooter is fine by me.

 

[Sako Shooter]

Yes, to my eyes a scope is necessary for cutting edge accuarcy. I like to do a lot of 50-75 yard shooting with these "red dot" sticky targets, The dot is about the size of the .22 caliber bullet hole. I can't even see the dot with my naked eye from 50 yards, much less 75 yards, so yes, at least a 14x scope is necessary for that detailed amount of accuracy. Even with a 9x scope, I feel limited at much past 35-40 yards aiming at a target that small.

When I bought my CZ 452 Trainer, I was shocked to see the test target was about a 1" group, but then again it was shot with open sights.

The best thing to do is to set up some targets at 50 yards and shoot some groups using open sights, then switch to a high magnification scope and compare.

 

[ball3006]

When you have old eyes an optical sight of some kind is needed........I have a red dot on mine and at 22 ranges of fire, it is just fine.....chris3

 

[red rick]

I would say no for hunting and yes for making 1 hole in a target.

Many years ago I was squirrel hunting with my brother. He shot a squirrel out of a tree 78 paces away with his Gleenfield .22 with that cheap Tasco scope that came on it. It looked so far away that we paced it out and it was a head shot.

I shot more with my lever action Ithaca, but none that far away.

 

[RonZ]

Scope or not depends on what you like to shoot.

I plink Cans at 40yds with a iron sighted bolt action Savage 84C (grandpa's gun)
I shoot paper at 50 - 100 yds with a Scoped, bench rested, "out of the box" Ruger 10/22. (sub 1.5" groups consistently)

Both are a blast.

 

[benzy2]

I'd rather start a new shooter on a low powered scope. I've seen a few have problems with irons and lose interest in shooting. Placing the crosshairs on target is a lot easier than lining up irons. Once the initial basic of trigger pull and cheek weld are found, I like to then move to irons. I like to eliminate as many variables for a new shooter as possible. As such, skipping irons on the initial days holds value to me. Not to say I don't think everyone who shoots should be proficient with iron sights. I just find them to be a tossed in a little down the road.

As for use in the field, I'll take a good red dot or 1-4x scope over most irons. Not that it can't be done with irons, just that it's easier with either a red dot or a scope set to 1x.

 

[shiftyer1]

I only have 1 scoped rifle and that happens to be a .22. Although there will be more to come. I've finally admitted that I just don't see so good anymore. I feel it's very important to know how to use iron sights but when targets at distance start to get fuzzy scopes sure help.

 

[Snowbandit]

Depends on what you're using the .22 for. Mind is for cheap practice with the same platform I use for large game and varmits around the farm. It wears a fairly high quality 4-12 scope with paralax adjustable down to 20 yards. I think too many install a cheap Wal-Mart scope on their .22's then get disillusioned with them when they don't work too well.

 

[skoro]

It is when you've passed 50 and can't focus on both the front sight and the target simultaneously.

 

[kk0g]

It is when you've passed 50 and can't focus on both the front sight and the target simultaneously.

The human eye can't foocus on two different planes simultaneously no matter what your age. This is why you focus on the front sight and let the target blur.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I have a rack full of .22s. Three of them have aperture (peep) sights -- an M1922 MK2 Springfield, a Remington 541-X target rifle, and a Stevens Favorite (made around 1895) with a tang sight.

The Gae Bolga, my M82 Kimber, which is my primary squirrel rifle, wears a 4x Burris scope. My M15Y Marlin (a chidren's gun) wears a 3 X 9 variable, as does my 77/22M Ruger.

Only my Stevens #26 Crackshot (made in 1915) has open sights.

 

[alexanderplatz]

I enjoy plinking at clay pigeons at 100-125 yards with a scoped .22 rifle. It isn't pinpoint accuracy (for me at least) but it's fun to break up the pigeons into smaller and smaller shards, and to have to account for windage at that range.

 

[viking499]

I prefer irons for basic shooting. But with eyes like mine nowadays, scope are almost necessary.

I have always felt that if a beginner started shooting with irons, it would be all down hill (in a good way) from there. Anyone can start out with a scope, but better techniques are learned from irons.

 

[WNTFW]

A.22 with irons is a great way to learn to shoot an iron sighted rifle. If you want to learn to use a scope the the .22 is a great place to start. Switching between the two seems to help me shoot better with both.

Overall I use iron sights more. More so if I count handguns. Problem is not all irons that come on a gun are that good. Upgrading sights can make a world of difference.

 

[benzy2]

You have a good point benzy as long as everything is setup well on that .22 with a scope. If the scope gets off though it can take a new shooter a long time to figure out that it's the problem and not their shooting Of course the same thing can happen with irons but it just seems easier to bump a scope hard enough to move it especially if it's a dovetail mount. Those Model 60's are know to have scope mounts move around on their dovetail mounts. If the new shooter had someone to check their rifle a=on a regular basis then I have little doubt the scoped .22 could be a better way to learn. It also would need to be able to shoot targets close enough that the shooter could identify where they were shooting. That's actually pretty hard for many people using a 3-9 scope at 50 yards especially if they aren't hitting close to the bullseye anyway.

. Yes, it would have to be a quality scope and mounted correctly with solid mounts. I've seen some rimfire dovetail mounts walk, but there are a few cheap stops for that. Either way, I wouldn't train someone on a rifle that wasn't sighted in and wasn't capable to hold zero. If I was shooting a scope/mount that I didn't trust, I would rather go with irons to start.

but better techniques are learned from irons.

I'm not sure I know what technique differs from irons to a scope, other than lining the irons up rather than lining the crosshair up. Care to expand?

 

[mister2]

It all depends...

...on

1. one's eyes, (with mine, they're a godsend)

2. and the intended purpose (Plinker, varmint, target, other competition)

3. There are scopes and there are "scopes". Red dot, IER, fixed, variable,

4. Rules, as in Olympics v. local club ACTS, etc.

"Necessary"? By no means.

"Worthless"? I'd disagree with that. But that's just me.

MR2

 

[Naybor]

I agree with having multiple rifles.
I have a Marlin Model 60 semi-auto with iron sights (It's 3x9x40 scope is in a drawer) for plinking.
Also have a Marlin MN25 .22 mag. bolt action with a 4x12x40 scope for tack driving on small varmints. It did take a coyote at 100+ yards with a heart shot.

One interesting combo I've been considering is the .22 with a 2 power shotgun scope. Might do ok. Hmmm...........?

 

[4v50 Gary]

Consider the following criteria on whether a 22 rifle should be equipped with optical sights:

What is the purpose?
How are the shooter's eyes?
Does the shooter need optical sights for the purpose in mind?

Most of my 22 rifles are iron sighted, but a few are scoped.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Michael R.
scope on a 22 necessary?
hello,
i have a question about scopes on a 22. are they really necessary or is it better to learn the basics with iron sights? i always feel scopes on a 22 are worthless. i just want your guys opinions.

I'm old school. Always start with iron sights then move to optics because optics are not always available and that is not the time to start learning how to sight with iron.

 

[skoro]

The human eye can't foocus on two different planes simultaneously no matter what your age. This is why you focus on the front sight and let the target blur.

Oh, I used to have eyesight that'd allow me to shoot real well with open sights. I could put 10 out of 10 in the bull at 500 yards with the old M16a1. Qualified as both a rifle and pistol expert back in the day. But as I passed 50, I noticed the open sights didn't work for me any more. Couldn't focus as well as I did in my younger days. It's part of the price almost all of us pay for living so long. I can still hit the things I aim at with a scope, though.

 

[A strange person]

No.