Sights versus accuracy

[BandeauRouge]

Im curious. My favorite iron sights on one modern gun has a front hood has the nice ring shade. And the rear is a plain notch in a sheet of metal that is perfectly flat to my plane of vision.

My handguns use the same basic set up from the factory.

I e seen the typical sights used on kibker long rifles, and the ones on most factory production ones seem to look like they leave a tad to be desired.

Lots of posts on replacing longrifle sights on all brands. My question is that since I am used to one method of sight, how do I know if bad groupings are caused by me, the sightsnot being what im used to using, or a ball size or patch size or lube issue?

Looking at sights pictures, there are guys getting 5" groups at supposed 100 yards and complaining the sights are none functional. But I can find pics of guys using a strip of copper sheet screwed in the tang holes, bent and notched off center with scissors and claiming 2" at 150..

Modern guns edited out by moderator.

[rich pierce]

Ok, it’s likely that you shoot best with the type of sights you’ve been using for decades. That’s true regardless of their form. Some folks change sights as they get older. Wider sights, mainly.

We do not question the accuracy results people share here, ever.

There are shooters I know who can shoot most guns into a 2” group off the bench at 50 yards. Hand them my gun and they do it. There are shooters I see at ranges who cannot shoot a 6” group at 50 yards off the bench with a scoped rifle. Usually it’s the shooter, not the sights.

[Maven]

You shoot better when you can see your sights clearly,  regardless of their design.  Once that happens, the rest is up to you.  (Don't ask....!)

[Daryl]

Rich and Paul, both excellent responses. Some of us mix nationalities on our guns just because we like a particular ztyle of sight. I am referring to using a British Express-type rear sight with a smallish bead, just because its easier to see for aging eyes. These are my preference and i can stîll see those. V anf U rear sights are just too fuzzy nowadays.

[BandeauRouge]

My first muzzleloader had fiber optic factory sights that tucked. The competition front sight tucked for me because the front insert confused my brain and I was happy to hit paper at 20 yards.  At 20 yards without the insert I cut groups in half, and a piece of white tape gave me baseball sized groups.

O bought an iron sighted modern gun from a minor level shooter. I was told his best load could do 2" off a bench at 100 yards. The target he sent with it had his best load data on it. I measured with a ruler. 12" group at the written 100 yards.

[MuskratMike]

It also depends on how authentic you want to be. yes all my rifles are hand made and represent the late 1700's to the early 1800's. The sights on these rifles represent what the sights from this period would be. Just like I wouldn't wear a new multi colored pair of hiking shoes to a primitive rendezvous, I would not want a globe front sight and a modern adjustable rear tang sight on a late 1700's frontier rifle. Would the new style sights shoot better with my old fuzzy eyes? Probably but it is important to me to have them original.

[BandeauRouge]

It also depends on how authentic you want to be. yes all my rifles are hand made and represent the late 1700's to the early 1800's. The sights on these rifles represent what the sights from this period would be. Just like I wouldn't wear a new multi colored pair of hiking shoes to a primitive rendezvous, I would not want a globe front sight and a modern adjustable rear tang sight on a late 1700's frontier rifle. Would the new style sights shoot better with my old fuzzy eyes? Probably but it is important to me to have them original.
[/quote

Then explain how the pedersoli flintlock Jager target has that tang mounted peep sight?

I see homemade rear sights on colonial represented flintlocks, 1 was a cute strip of copper flashing screwed into yang bolt and bent and notched.

[New Fowler]

Just put the sight on the gun that you want on the gun? Lyman globe sights exist, and you can fit them to whatever rifle, or you can have them fitted to any rifle. If all you want are globe style sights, a tc hawken or a Lyman great plains with a tang peep sight and a lyman globe front seems to fix your problem. It may also be that your eyes don't see irons as well as other peoples. People like what they like. The world doesn't need to conform to your views friend.

[Scota4570]

I have found that a wider front sight say about 0.1",  and a slightly deeper rear 60* v-notch works well for me.  The person who makes the sights probably intends for the shooter to have room to modify the rear notch. 

Thin front blades and a tiny notches are a young man's game. 

[New Fowler]

I have found that a wider front sight say about 0.1",  and a slightly deeper rear 60* v-notch works well for me.  The person who makes the sights probably intends for the shooter to have room to modify the rear notch. 

Thin front blades and a tiny notches are a young man's game.

This is a great answer. I'm a young man, and I really like fine sights. My dad, and his friends are all on the search for thicker front sights, and wider rear sights. Glasses help, but eventually the eyes just go, glasses or no, and the wider more open sights are easier to see with definition.

[recurve]

peep sight group at 100 2 high then filed rear sight next 3 on target co witnessed with rear open sight front sight brass filed 45%



5 shot group 100 yrds open sights
front brass sight file at 45% rear sight flat top 1/8 gap

[recurve]

https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/Smileys/default/undecided.gif


these are some of the ghost ring sight /peep sight (smaller hole, harder to see in low light)



ghost rings work like the battle sights on the m16 large aperture   vs the smaller closer to a peep sight for longer targets

[BandeauRouge]

https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/Smileys/default/undecided.gif


these are some of the ghost ring sight /peep sight (smaller hole, harder to see in low light)



ghost rings work like the battle sights on the m16 large aperture   vs the smaller closer to a peep sight for longer targets

But adjust of rear works how with cast steel or brass

[Birddog6]

Back to the beginning.....  The first thing one must do is Eliminate shooters error.
That means a solid bench, sand bags front & rear  .Only 3 shots per target & you DO NOT
want to hit the bull.  Move front or rear sight over if ya have to. If you hit it, it distorts the
sight picture. You need a Clean dot every time, not one with holes in the edges.

So do 3 targets & see if the Load is wrong, or the Shooter needs work.  If the load is bad, doesn't matter if you are dead on or not, it will not group. 

So eliminate the human error  for starters.

[recurve]

yes a good solid bench and a good shooting regiment breathing control trigger squeeze and if it does not feel right start over. I like 5 shot groups and throw out the odd flyer as long as the results are repeatable. 
as far as hitting the bull I work up the load then move sights that's why my targets confuse some







a peep sight forces you to mount the rifle the same (co witness your other sights helps) and remove a variable to reach the best load.

[BandeauRouge]

On some of these peeps shown, the portion containing the actual peep hole is at random angles to the barrel axis, I've always seen the peep hole and it's mounting plain need be perpendicular to the barall and

[Daryl]

These sights I see perfectly, with barely any fuzziness. Narrow U and V sights are too fuzzy for anything resembling good shooting.
With these sights, the bead is placed in the bottom of the wide V. No fuzziness and they actually shoot quite well as will be seen.





This is what "we" put on my .69, that Taylor built me in 1986.
You could file whatever shape you wanted.


For me, for longer ranges of 200 to 300 meters, I used small notches, however that was 1986. Now, I can't see them so it's wide V's that I can see.



I filed off the first one and now have only 3 folding leaf sights, 100, 150 and 200meters.



As to accuracy with this type of sight, here's a composite target Taylor did for comparison of our 100 meter targets. We shot this after a morning at the range
to see who would buy lunch. This is the last 100 meter target I shot with my .69. I pulled a shot, it appears. Taylor was shooting an original 16 bore built in
England in 1852 or 53 that had ZERO load development. We just picked a load we thought should shoot fairly well.