Smith And Wesson Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,905 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know that many of you guys love these for deer hunting on a lever action rifle. I have changed the sights on my Winchester 94 to a Williams FP. I know that you hate them Drew!!! But, not everybody has your $$$$$. I can't really notice a difference in my groups (3"-4" on a good day). Is this because the .30-30 cartridge has only so-so accuracy? OR.....I am just an old flatlander that can't shoot......to save my life!!!! lgfhj l;nfPNFIw nfiofnp Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,683 Posts
Receiver sights don't make a rifle shoot better, they just give you the opportunity to get a more precise and uniform sight picture shot-to-shot. Careful positioning of the front bead in the V of a rear barrel sight can give you almost as precise sighting if you take the time - and can focus clearly on both sights and the target. :D

Receiver sights are quicker to put on target because you don't have to think about the rear sight. You just bring up the gun to shooting position and lay the bead on your target. They also offer a longer sighting radius between front and rear than the barrel-mounted rear sight can offer, and the longer the better for precise shot placement.

Besides all that, there's the benefit of sharper focus that rear-mounted peep sights offer for older eyes. There's a whole 'nother thread on that subject, but again, the sharper focus gives opportunity for better shot placement.

xtm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,171 Posts
As I have said in earlier posts, I can't shoot a receiver site for beans! Give me a good rear buckhorn type site any day! ;) I look thru a receiver site and there floating in the middle of it is the front site...IMHO there's no precision to it! Perhaps I have not shot receiver sites enough to perfect their usage...and perhaps my eyes aren't THAT bad just yet (I'm 48 ;) ).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,255 Posts
I usually put scopes on my rifles but I do like the receiver sight like this Williams 5D which usta stand for $5.00 but sure doesn't any more.

I have since gotten a Foolproof to replace the 5D. Guess what? That is no longer $9.00.

The firesight makes a nice addition to the combo but is of course not really cowboy original.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,171 Posts
I too put scopes on every rifle EXCEPT for Winchester lever actions, which IMHO aren't meant to have scopes. I am saddened everytime I see a vintage Winchester 71 (or 53, or 55, or 64, etc.) with holes drilled in the left side of the receiver for an old scope mount! :cry:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,677 Posts
I wonder why Anny Oakely didnt use peep sites? I dont think either style of sight is better than the other. Just a matter of preference.The first peep site I ever used was on the m-16 in the army.I didnt care for it to much but of course I didnt care for the rattling flimsey pea shooter m-16 either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,905 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
There must be somethin' to 'em, because target shooters always use them. I personally like low power scopes, and Red Dots. They just offer a better, more accurate, sight picture. But, they don't belong on a Win.
M-94.

I don't see it as a percision sight......but why do target shooters use them??? I don't particularly like them, but they are an improvement for 'older shooters'. (like me!) That, and the fact that my eyes aren't gettin' any better, lately, have made me give them a try. Bb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,677 Posts
I dont know about the other two. But Anny Oakely talked about using her sights and if you watch her old clips she looked right down them when she was shooting.
I could see how a peep site especialy one that is a tube would be easier to see the front site though. Because I have been near sighted since about seventh grade and I can look down a tube and like a paper towel roll and read distant objects I cannot with out the tube or my glasses.
The only gun I own with a scope is a 10-22 and thats only so I can see rabbits after dark.When your used to using open sights all the time your stock weld automaticly lines up the sights.I never line up my sites they just come in line all I do is put the front site on what I am wanting to hit and shoot.
It took me a while to get a stock weld with a peep sight. At first I had to bring it up and then get my front sight centered in the circle of the peep.After a while I found my stock weld and when I looked through the peep the front sight was already lined up like I did so many years with the open sites.I shoot with both eyes open but a peep impairs my vision.
I can also see how they would work well for target shooting to though.
I can shoot with either style but my preference is regular notched style iron sights.On a model 94 the range is so short I cannot see any purpose for a scope my self and agree the side mount not only is odd and ugly it ruins the guns collector value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,905 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Jim, That Firesight seems to be the answer to me. It's a better sight!!!But, I hardly ever use my Win. 94, and keep it in fine condition on the rack. I use cheap 1" low power scopes on my .22 rifles, (2 1/2x Tasco on the Ruger 10/22 & 4x BSA on the Savage MK 1) and a Bushnell Red Dot on my S&W M-17. They are definitely what I need, but have no place on a 94. Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,683 Posts
Bob K said:
....I hardly ever use my Win. 94, and keep it in fine condition on the rack....Bob
Sorry for the OT drift, but I've forgotten whether or not you reload.

It is a shame that you don't shoot that '94 more often. If you have the equipment, you could be loading lead bullets. With light target loads, they are a lot of low-recoil fun - and great practice for when you shoot the occasional standard factory load.

Another good thing about the receiver sights with precision micrometer adjustments is that you can carefully record the exact marks for your light load and for your hunting load - and move back-and-forth depending on what you're shooting. I do it all the time, and it usually doesn't even require a tweak if I'm really careful to be exact. Just try to do that with a buckhorn barrel sight and the little slide-adjustment V! :lol:

xtm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,677 Posts
Bobk I was looking at some specialy desighned shooting glasses a while back. My vision is deteriorating slowly and I know I will eventualy have to start scopeing my guns I want to shoot also.Although I wear glasses and am near sighted I always have had perfect vison at reading distance.It made no difference if I had my glasses on or off . But in the last six or seven years I have to remove my glasses to see things clearly at reading distance.
The optomatrists told me I could just take my glasses off to read or he could set me up with bi focals.Bi focals are out of the question because I operate heavy eguipment and to watch my cutting edge I look through the lower part of my lense on my glasses and it would mess me all up.
So I surfed around looking at alternatives and found some reviews and and finaly a url to a optomatrist that makes glasses especialy made for shooting.You may have tried them also and I would be interested in your opinion of them and if not and your interested in them I will put a link for you to go have a look see if it interests you.
I e-mailed him a while back and he replied saying all I need to do is go to my optomatrist and get a prescription and send it and he can make them.The bifocal part instead of being down at the bottom of the lense is moved up next to the inside of the lense like if you are right handed it would be laying along the bridge of your nose so you naturaly look through it as you look down sights.
I read the reviews on them and they sound pretty good but I havent talked to any one who owns a pair but would like to get there feed back on them.
I think he said they were around 250 bucks a set.
http://www.hansenseagleeye.com/index.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,171 Posts
xtimberman said:
Bob K said:
....I hardly ever use my Win. 94, and keep it in fine condition on the rack....Bob
Sorry for the OT drift, but I've forgotten whether or not you reload.

It is a shame that you don't shoot that '94 more often. If you have the equipment, you could be loading lead bullets. With light target loads, they are a lot of low-recoil fun - and great practice for when you shoot the occasional standard factory load.

Another good thing about the receiver sights with precision micrometer adjustments is that you can carefully record the exact marks for your light load and for your hunting load - and move back-and-forth depending on what you're shooting. I do it all the time, and it usually doesn't even require a tweak if I'm really careful to be exact. Just try to do that with a buckhorn barrel sight and the little slide-adjustment V! :lol:

xtm
I actually LIKE having to compensate and "hold over" with my buckhorn sites, or for that matter, S&W rear revolver sites, as that allows me to learn more about the gun and load. If you've ever shot an S&W at long range (200 yds. +), you know that there is not sufficient elevation adjustment in the rear site to compensate for the trajectory. I like being able to know how much to hold over to employ, and I find it easy to do with a rear buckhorn site! (YMMV - Your mileage may vary!) ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
656 Posts
Receiver sights? I have them on a bunch of bolt guns but none of my lever guns. Go figure.









 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,905 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
SP, The receiver sights give those bolt action a sleek look! While I use scopes on my .22 rifles, it's only because I need to see the target....and the sights. That's the main reason. My eyes ain't gettin' any better, these days. :roll: Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,905 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
XTM, I don't reload.....but I'm not really interested in doing it. Seems kind of tedious to me. It just seems like a big initial outlay of money, when I'm not sure I'd like it. I start many hobbies...like photography, back in college. After awhile, though I did get pretty good at it, it seemed like it was all for nothing! It also got pretty expensive.....something that I couldn't afford, considering the bad turn that my life made, after a motorcycle accident. I still live with the scars and reminders of that one, 35+ years later. :roll: Bob
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top