Short Sight Radii...Why?

[BerettaNut92]

Rifles like some of the hunting guns, why are the sight radii so short? Wouldn't it better to put the rear sight on the back of the receiver instead of the front and rear sight on the barrel?

 

[Kaylee]

Wouldn't it better to put the rear sight on the back of the receiver instead of the front and rear sight on the barrel?

Well yeah... unless you want to use the rear bridge to put a low-mounted scope on.

Other'n that, I think its --

bolt rifles -- hardly anybody uses irons on 'em anymore anyhow, so if they're present at all, the sights are rudimentary.

lever rifles -- there are aftermarket receiver (and tang) sights available.. but it's mostly a tradition thing, I think.. and the ranges those guns are typically used at. Granted, after seeing "real" buckhorns on a friend's CAS levergun I ain't terrible impressed with stock semi-bucks.

-K

 

[zahc]

A tang sight is far better than the barrel mounted sights in most rifles. I hate open sights of any kind. The arpeture sight made them obsolete like 440 years ago. JMO.

 

[C.R.Sam]

Short radius, open sights good for quick acquisition of target.

Long radius, apature sights good for driving tacks at distance.

With multitudinous combinations in between.

Sam

 

[JohnBT]

Then there are takedown guns like the Browning Auto .22 that are prone to a certain 'looseness' between the barrel and the receiver. You're much better off with both sights on the barrel than having one on each half of the gun. That loose connection is also why the gun does better with the scope mounted on the barrel.

I believe that if the makers would put above-average sights on their rifles more and more people would use them. CZ does and is known for it. I'm straining to think of another example.

John