Where did my rear sight go?

[hightime]

My eyes, my eyes! About ten years ago I went to open sights to make white tail hunting more interesting and to keep the leverguns lookin' good.
But I am having some problems focusing. I have a couple leverguns made for scopes. I just can't stand the look of that carrying handle. A 3/4'' , 18'' straight tube like a Leatherwood might be cool.
Do you think they have enough light gathering ability for a dusk shot? Is there issues? How about mounting? I have a Winchester '94 Legacy 30-30 and a Marlin 1895 Cowboy 45-70. Is there other options?

Owen

[Don McDowell]

No that scope doesn't have enough light gathering for a dusk or dawn shot, and the mounts are not dependable enough to count on the zero being where you think you left it.
Get with your optometrist and get a pair of lenses ground that you can shoot with or go with a modern scope.

[guido4198]

Owen,
What have you done about modifying the glasses you wear when you hunt/shoot since noticing this issue...???
With most of my guns, to resolve my aging eye issues, I went to scopes and red dot sights. They do the trick just fine.
HOWEVER....the fly-in-the-buttermilk with that solution is that there are a few pieces in my collection that I just don't want to do that to. e.g.: an original Win. M-71, and a Hawken muzzleloader.
To keep shooting those classics the way they were intended...I had a shooter's optician(Bud Decot-http://www.sportglasses.com/) fix up special lenses for my shooting glasses. After explaining my problem, they built a set of lenses as follows: One side is ground to allow me to see the target clearly, the other is ground to allow me to see the sights clearly. The optician said to keep both eyes open ( which I do anyway), and let my brain figure it out. It takes a little getting used to, but those special shooting glasses put me back in the hunt (so to speak). They work well enough for me to enjoy shooting those iron sight rifles, and kill Whitetail out to 100 yds reliably.
(FWIW: I'm using a peep on the M-71, and an open slot adj. rear/ patridge front blade on the Hawken. )

Hope this helps.

[Pete44ru]

.

Owen, have you given a receiver aperture/peep sight a fair try ?

Although they don't last as long into the dusky hours as a scope, I've found I can use them for 99% of my hunting/shooting, using either a restrictive aperture or removing it & using the resulting "ghost ring".

To brighten the picture even more, I've long gone with fiber-optic bead front sights (FireSight, HiViz, TruGlo) as a companion to a peep sight.



.

[North Country Gal]

The size of the scope, in terms of the diameter of the front lens, is only part of the light equation. There is also magnification being used and the type of lens coatings and even lens quality. In short, even a small 20mm front lens (objective) - about as small as it gets in scopes, these days - is capable of delivering more light than our aging eyes can use, as long as the you keep the magnification down (3x or 4x) and the scope is using up to date optical technology.

As far as mounting a Malcom, you should visit with those folks, direct. Personally, with all the interest in lever guns, these days, I think mainline riflescope makers are missing the boat, big time, by not producing more Malcom style scopes for us lever gun traditionalists. Unfortunately, the scope folks seem headed in the other direction with ever larger turrets and gadgetry that would do a submarine justice.

One option I think more of us aging lever gun folks should explore is red dot sights. Red dots are small enough and light enough not to affect the handling and balance that we love so much in our lever guns. Red dots are also the fastest acquisition sights you can put on a lever gun, in my opinion. That red dot is more visible than any front sight and as long as you can see that dot, you are good to go. No need to line up the eye behind a peep. And, of course, in low light that red dot is even easier to see. Anyway, just food for thought in case those other options don't work out for you.

[AJMD429]

One option I think more of us aging lever gun folks should explore is red dot sights. Red dots are small enough and light enough not to affect the handling and balance that we love so much in our lever guns. Red dots are also the fastest acquisition sights you can put on a lever gun, in my opinion. That red dot is more visible than any front sight and as long as you can see that dot, you are good to go. No need to line up the eye behind a peep. And, of course, in low light that red dot is even easier to see. Anyway, just food for thought in case those other options don't work out for you.

The Burris Fastfire-II is at least pretty small and unobtrusive.

Some gizmo-inventer should come up with a red-dot sight small enough to fit in a 'tang sight' body - make it look just like a big target aperture...

[pokey]

One option I think more of us aging lever gun folks should explore is red dot sights. Red dots are small enough and light enough not to affect the handling and balance that we love so much in our lever guns. Red dots are also the fastest acquisition sights you can put on a lever gun, in my opinion. That red dot is more visible than any front sight and as long as you can see that dot, you are good to go. No need to line up the eye behind a peep. And, of course, in low light that red dot is even easier to see. Anyway, just food for thought in case those other options don't work out for you.

The Burris Fastfire-II is at least pretty small and unobtrusive.

Some gizmo-inventer should come up with a red-dot sight small enough to fit in a 'tang sight' body - make it look just like a big target aperture...

or a fold down red dot receiver sight. that holds zero when flipped up, of course.

[mikld]

My solution for old eyes was/is an aperture sight. I was off from shooting for about 5 years and when I went back I couldn't see the sights. Couldn't afford special glasses so I went with receiver sights on my long guns and a "One Ragged Hole" sight for my Ruger SBH (after much experimentation/study). For my other handguns, I have since learned to shoot/focus relatively well and it ain't too much of a problem...

[Borregos]

.

Owen, have you given a receiver aperture/peep sight a fair try ?

Although they don't last as long into the dusky hours as a scope, I've found I can use them for 99% of my hunting/shooting, using either a restrictive aperture or removing it & using the resulting "ghost ring".

To brighten the picture even more, I've long gone with fiber-optic bead front sights (FireSight, HiViz, TruGlo) as a companion to a peep sight.



.

+1

[L_Kilkenny]

It's been years since I used a 3/4" tube scope, for good reason. Go receiver sight or find an older Weaver 2.5 or 3x scope. Those have no objective bell and are glossy steel tubed. In short, they look the part and are good scopes.

[jeepnik]

I had the same problem begin over a couple of decades ago. I went to the eye doc and told him it seemed like I needed more light to see things clearly, and my current glasses just weren't cutting it. His response was "welcome to middle age". I did two things. Got new glasses and started switching my firearms to ghost ring rear sights.

My favorite levergun is set up with a ghost ring rear and a C-More holo sight. It works real well and is fast even in tight cover with low light.

[Mescalero]

My personal doubts about shotguns for primary arms is well known,so this may come as a stunning admission.
My Mossberg 500 has a set of aftermarket Mossberg ghost ring sights on it.
I too have the old eyes problem, but these sights are the fastest to aquire, and the clearest sights I have ever used.
My best advice, find someone with a good set of ghost rings and shoot it.
I think you will like it.

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

.

Owen, have you given a receiver aperture/peep sight a fair try ?

Although they don't last as long into the dusky hours as a scope, I've found I can use them for 99% of my hunting/shooting, using either a restrictive aperture or removing it & using the resulting "ghost ring".

To brighten the picture even more, I've long gone with fiber-optic bead front sights (FireSight, HiViz, TruGlo) as a companion to a peep sight.



.

I agree and have the old eyes to prove it.

Here is something I saved from Skinner sights.

Here is some information on sighting errors as put forth by no less than, Col.Townsend Whelen, in his book on reloading, "Why Not Load Your Own," published in 1949 when the use of telescopic sights was a rarity. With normal eyesight, either naturally or corrected by glasses, he found that the following list applied at a distance of 100 yards:

Open Rear Sight: Accuracy is unpredictable due to lighting conditions (shoots away from side lighting, and high for overhead mid-day conditions).
Aperture Rear, Gold or Ivory bead front: 1.5 -2"
Aperture Rear, Black Post front: 1"
Aperture Rear, Aperture front: 1/2 to 3/4"
2-1/2x Scope: 1/4-1/2"
6x Scope: 1/8" to 1/4"
10x Scope: 1/16" to 1/8"
20x Scope: Practically None.
As you can see from the information above, the ability to sight using a aperture sight exceeds the accuracy of most rifles.

All military battle rifles and many "Dangerous Game Guns" have been fitted with peep sights for at least the last 70 years. There is a good reason for this. They are the fastest and most accurate iron sight you can put on your rifle.

Andy Larson, the owner of Skinner Sights make the upper parts for my Adjustable Bolt-Mounted Peep Sight Safety Replacement.


For low light folks are using red or green fiber op fronts and once the gun is sighted in they are removing the aperture from the peep to make a ghost ring.

[3leggedturtle]

For hunting or plinking,take the aperture out for a cheap ghost ring setup. I do this with most of my rifles. My 1895SS will give 1 hole groups at 50 yards, and 1 1/2" at 100 yards doing this with a WILLIAMS fp sight.

[deafrn]

I am of the persuasion that a good aperture rear sight is the most useful - and generally cost-effective - aids to aging eyes. Unfortunately, I'm getting past the point where they do me as much good as they did, because I am now having trouble with the front sight as well. I still have reasonable success with a "striped" XS front blade and an aperture rear with a screw-in disk (I need a smaller diameter aperture in the disk to get the front in any semblance of focus).

Lately, I have become ambivalent about true "ghost rings," not particularly caring for them on some guns that I either don't use much or don't fit well enough, because I have to "hunt" to line up with the "ring" when I bring up the weapon in low light. Actually USING some ghost ring setups in very low light have left me glad I didn't just "install and assume!" (I'm a clumsy shotgunner at best, so YMMV, but on a shotgun I do better with an XS Big Dot over the factory bead and no rear sight, or XS Big Dot/Express "V" on a Remington RS barrel; the rear on the latter is just a "suggestion" blur anyway.)

The Aimpoint Micro reflex sight is my hands-down favorite no-magnification "cure" for personal vision woes, but the Burris FastFireIII is not too shabby either. I resisted such things a long time, but an old dog can learn new tricks if he has sufficient motivation.

[North Country Gal]

I am of the persuasion that a good aperture rear sight is the most useful - and generally cost-effective - aids to aging eyes. Unfortunately, I'm getting past the point where they do me as much good as they did, because I am now having trouble with the front sight as well.

This is where I am, now, after switching over to peep sights some years, ago. Peeps gave my eyes a stay of execution, but it's only been temporary.

I think it is important to understand that presbyopia - the inability to focus clearly on close objects as our lenses age - varies from individual to individual. My husband who is five years older than me has no such issues when shooting. Thus, what works for one shooter may not work for another. For some of us, if we want to shoot our best, we have to bite the bullet and go scope or red dot.

[Old Savage]

It is "hightime" you face facts and go with the scope. All this bellyaching about scopes --- you guys are getting old --- just face it, bite the bullet and do what you have to do. I liked mine when I could do 1 1/2" at 100 with the open sights but when it opened to 10" with visual changes I put an old Weaver 4X on it and went to 3/4" at 100 with the right ammo.

On the bright side - it changed again and I can shoot decent groups with some opens under some conditions but not 3/4".

[Malamute]

Peep sights definately are an improvement, though I've gotten past my aversion to scopes. Results in the field are more important than my old prejudices. My eyes aren't what they used to be, but I can still hit the 300 yard plate with a pistol. A scope simply allows me to shoot better in more varied conditions than I can with irons of any sort, including making shots in light so poor I can't even see irons. If I could afford to, I'd scope nearly all of my guns with Leupold glass. I have a model 71, and would have no issue with having clean, compact bases made and mounted on the barrel to put a forward scope on it. That addition, with losing a couple inches of barrel would make it a nearly perfect general purpose mountain gun for me.

[donw]

i installed a 2x tasco on my 1894c, 357/38 carbine.

although...i DO like open/iron sights...i'm guilty of having been trained with iron of the M1 Garand by the US Army.

i still use the 'buckhorn' sights of the 39AS marlin, too, but i'm considering a scope for it, too.

ya gotta be able to see it to hit it...

[Grizz]

Same thing Mescalaro said. I was shocked by the ease of using my chicom shotgun. I never wanted a post sight because I had such stunning success shooting aperture sights with bead fronts. I put a rifle bead sight on my sbh 44 and shot it like a carbine. Made lots of meat.

Eventually I started seeing two or three beads, which can get exciting if you shoot the wrong bear with the wrong bead. (double entendre) Finally I lined up the big block norinco ramp and post on the gongs and was shocked, shocked I tell you how easy it was to use the post sight that I had avoided for so long....

I also put fiber sights on some leverguns but the williams receiver isn't as open as the big block chicom.

I think green lasers that live in the mag tube sound like a good idea, but as long as the chunky sight works I'll stick with it. Batteries not necessary.

[Mescalero]

Just my prejudice, electronics batteries, etc.,
my luck, it will fail at the most inopportune time.

[deafrn]

I forgot to mention one other phenomenon accompanying my own decrease in visual accommodation: my coming around to shorter sight radiuses on handguns. As a younger man, I did not pay all that much attention to the old tests that had been done showing how some target pistol shooters with vision or holding issues improved their scores by shortening the barrel (and thus the sight radius) of their handgun. I didn't forget it completely, though.

Nobody in the house had done much shooting with really short-barreled, iron-sighted pistols for some time, but we ended up with an SP101 that had been upgraded with a Meprolight front blade. Talk about a change! That short sight radius and a very noticeable front aiming point was just what the ophthalmologist ordered. Later on, the family was introduced to the QAS on a Caracal C, and while the pistol did not stick around, what its unusual sight setup lacked in precision was compensated by a quick picture and the rear sight being almost on the same plane of focus as the front. In a way, it is the handgun equivalent the old timer who "reversed" the rear leaf sight in his rifle's dovetail, or the man who put the second bead just a little further forward on his shotgun's rib than everyone else.

(Iron sights are somewhat scriptural in that "there is nothing new under the sun" when it comes to certain concepts.)

As others have said, one size doesn't fit all... but we've never had it so good as far as a choice of what will get the job done as our eyes change.

[hightime]

I guess I'll leave the scope idea behind. Maybe I could live with a fiber optic front sight and a tang peep. I have been thinking of how a laser would work. I hadn't heard of one that fits in the mag. tube.

Owen

[centershot]

I'm with Old Savage on this one:

It is "hightime" you face facts and go with the scope. All this bellyaching about scopes --- you guys are getting old --- just face it, bite the bullet and do what you have to do. I liked mine when I could do 1 1/2" at 100 with the open sights but when it opened to 10" with visual changes I put an old Weaver 4X on it and went to 3/4" at 100 with the right ammo.

I'm 58 now, have been an insulin-dependent diabetic for 54 years. The effect of diabetes on your vision can be devastating. I can still drive, can still pass the driver's vision exam with one eye (barely), but due to focal laser treatments in the macula of both eyes I can no longer use iron sights with any utility. I hated to do it, but all my leverguns now wear scopes. I chose the Leupold Vari-X I 1-4 X shotgun scope with heavy crosshairs. They are short, lightweight, bright and complement the guns well. They allow me to continue to hunt and shoot; that's all that matters to me! If your vision is failing you, put a scope on it and go shoot!

So, how come Mescalero doesn't like variable scopes???

[3leggedturtle]

I also have a Henry 22 mag lever with an Aimpoint 9000L 2moa dot mounted. My Marlin Golden 39M has a Weaver 2.5x micro trac mounted on it. The "handles" don't really hurt their looks in my eye. Only reason I never mounted a scope on my 1895 is cuz all my scopes are mounted on other rifles. Tho I do have a scope base for it. Just cant remember where I stored it.