Where Are The Iron Sights Going?

[amprecon]

I was just at the Remington web site and they don't offer the ADL anymore, what they do offer is a "new and improved" version of it called the SPS and no offering of iron sights. Browning doesn't look like they offer iron sights, or Winchester. I don't know about Savage, can't access their website right now. Ruger has no M 77 MK II Standard rifles offered with iron sights. I'm just wondering, what the heck is up with that? A hunting rifle with no iron sights? Not that I use the iron sights on my Rem 700, but I do have them sighted in just in case my scope takes a hit. I won't have a rifle without iron sights, I just wonder why most of the manufacturers don't build their rifles with iron sights anymore. A bolt gun without a scope is a pretty light and handy rifle, to not have iron sights seems blasphemous .

 

[cslinger]

I am a comparitive young'un as far as the shooting world goes and I do not hunt and I totally agree. Iron sights should be standard equipment or at the very least a standard option.

Chris

 

[Cpl Punishment]

I think it's because people just don't buy iron-sighted rifles that much. Probably because it takes effort to learn to use them well, and most "hunters" would rather put a huge telescope on their rifle, than learn to shoot without one. If people don't buy them, they'll stop making them.

Just one of the reasons I prefer military rifles.

 

[ATAShooter]

Most of the "young guns" are dealing with the bolt action " If it has a scope, It's a sniper rifle " syndrome. I hunt with a M1 Garand and/or a M1A, and I tell ya, I can crash a deer just fine @ 3 to 5 hundred yards with the peep sights.

 

[Lonestar.45]

I agree. But when I got my BDL new in '87, I took the iron sights off, mounted a scope, and have never wished the irons were back on. If I need a backup, I've got other rifles.

Now, if I were in a situation where I was limited to 100yds or less consistently when I hunted, I might consider taking the scope off and just going with irons. But for a light and handy rifle with irons, that's what my 30-30 lever action is for.

On a hunting rifle though, the extra hunting time you get by using a scope is critical. Many times a big buck might only show on those first few minutes of sunrise or in the last few minutes of daylight. A good scope will extend your shootable times by just enough to possibly bag that buck. With irons, you'd be done hunting in that kind of light.

Whatever your views are though, I think the manufacturers should at least give folks the option of having irons on their bolt guns without going to a gunsmith to put them on.

 

[kennedy]

I have sold off most of my iron sighted mil surplus rifles since my eyes no long can see them, only buying rifles I can mount a scope on.

 

[Rembrandt]

No iron sights today.....no real bullets tomorrow, we'll probably be using heat seeking computer guided projectiles in another 20 years.

 

[JackOfAllTradesMasterAtNone]

Bought my son his first Deer rifle this year. A single shot Rossi with interchangable barrels. .22, .243, and 20ga. Open sights are manditory in my house for new shooters. Sure, the rifle came with a Weaver style rail. And he'll probably get a fixed power scope for the .243 barrel next spring. But learning the basics, He's come to appreciate the differences in iron sight and scopes.

Unfortunately, as good optics that extend the shooters capabilities, are getting cheaper every year, we've become accustomed installing magnified optics on our rifles as a default. Manufactures have noticed this and are cutting machining costs by not even offering certain options. Sights.

You seem to be a Remington person, but take a look at Ruger (No.1 Sporter and International series single shots are all open sight.) Winchester (Safari grade are the only ones I see as being available with sights), All of the Marlin lever action guns are open sight. I'm sure there are others.

-Steve

 

[MCgunner]

Irons are fine on some guns, but my serious hunting bolt guns are naked of stuff that gets in the way of a low mounted scope. I had a smith remove the front sight from my M722 when I had it reblued. The rear was dove tailed and disappeared a long time ago. Only my SKS and a lever gun have irons now. That SKS I should cut the front sight off of cause on low power it's a blur in the scope and it catchs on brush and stuff now and then. But, since I'm no longer hunting with it, I left 'em on. Always a back up if the scope gets knocked off, I reckon.

I put a set of Millett adjustable "ring toppers" or something like that on my M7. I had 'em, was going to use 'em on a pistol, but wound up using a 30mm scope on it and they didn't fit that gun. So, they were just collecting dust when I put the scope on my new M7. Figured it'd add some bling, though they're pretty worthless with a five inch sight radius at best. I guess they could work up to 100 yards in a pinch if the rifle fell off a stand or something, but the scope I have on that thing is quite rugged. I haven't had to bother using 'em. They do make for a decent way to spot check the scope sight in, though, sort of a rough collimator.

 

[Average Joe]

I have iron sights on all my rifles, even the one with a scope. Just got this thing for rifle basics. Iron sights are just more fun.

 

[GD]

I use iron sights on most of my milsurps and practice their use almost weekly. Up to about 150 yards, I believe I can shoot just about as good with iron sights as I can with a scope. At distances of 500 yards (as described earlier) I would leave accurate shots to the scoped rifle. Shooting at game at those distances with iron sights is irresponsible is not sporting at all - you are just sending lead downrange. Even the best shooter would be lucky to get 10 inch groups at that range and a game animal would possibly move when the shot was made.
If you are bragging about those 500 yard shots on game, I would suggest gaining some skill at getting closer to the game and then brag about good shot placement.

 

[JohnKSa]

Money spent on scopes & mounts is money I would rather spend on ammo, targets or more guns. Time spent fiddling with scopes is time I would rather spend shooting instead.

If I want to upgrade my sights, I buy aperture sights. Still much cheaper than a decent scope, generally less hassle to mount and far more compact. And more fun...

 

[adaman04]

You can have the irons off my ADL! That is the ONLY thing I dislike about the rifle. Rifle sights should be an option. Not cost any more, but optional. They're just in the way. I think it is safe to say MOST people mount scopes on bolt guns. Yeah, I know its coming "Well, what if you're on a hunt and your scope breaks?"

Don't get me wrong, I like and enjoy irons on some guns. When I get my Marlin Guide, it's probably not getting any glass. Lever guns are great w/o scopes, but if I'm hunting antelope, I need my optics.

 

[CZguy]

You can have the irons off my ADL! That is the ONLY thing I dislike about the rifle. Rifle sights should be an option. Not cost any more, but optional. They're just in the way. I think it is safe to say MOST people mount scopes on bolt guns. Yeah, I know its coming "Well, what if you're on a hunt and your scope breaks?"

Don't get me wrong, I like and enjoy irons on some guns. When I get my Marlin Guide, it's probably not getting any glass. Lever guns are great w/o scopes, but if I'm hunting antelope, I need my optics.

I don't know if you really need them. I have hunted antelope with great success using a Lyman receiver peep sight on my 30 year old ADL

I think it is a VERY commonly held belief, that you can't hit anything at long range without a scope.

I have to agree with JohnKSa