Aperture sight questions and...

[steve123]

So I have this 40x repeater in 308. It has an an old Redfield rear aperture sight with adjustable iris which I don't mind keeping if possible, and a Redfield front aperture sight with a small sized insert.

Just so you know I don't shoot matches with this rifle and I rarely even shoot round bull paper targets, I do shoot at rocks and steel at long range with it just for fun. Like last weekend I was shooting at a 1'-ish rock at 650Y which was very tough to see! I hit it often but it was harder than it should have been because of my eyes. It's nice to have a sweet old iron sight rifle to do this type of shooting with on occasion and would like to keep with my non conformist style of plinking using irons!

Old eyes so it's getting hard to see small objects/targets in the hole in the front sights aperture. I've seen magnified lenses for both the front sight and for the rear sight which I think could help me make out the target better. Which one should I get, front or back lens system, benefits of each, compromises of each? Can I use my old sights or should I buy newer ones???

I might change the barrel in this rifle to 25x47L using the Blackjack 131's so wind doesn't affect so much, if I do I think that would be a good time to get a modern front aperture sight so which one is the best?

 

[Twdmar]

If you're not going to shoot targets, its probably not worth spending the money. Target irons are very expensive and very fragile. The old steel rpa sights like the ones from the m24 can take an insert and might even take a front diopter.
If the rear iris is adjustable crank it shut as much as possible. You want minimal light coming in your eye. The gehmann 510 is good for a rear iris.

 

[spclark]

Do you wear glasses now? When was your last eye exam? Do you wear glasses to drive, or read a newspaper (what are those??) or work with your computer?

Seeing objects you're aiming at, with 'match' sights - two small, round apertures - will be an exercise in frustration under anything but the best possible conditions. That's not what they're designed to be used for, that's nothing like the sight picture seen when your target is a black disc against a lighter, plain background field.

If your goal is to continue down this road I suggest you look for an insert that presents a post image in your front sight, upon which you can place the object you're targeting, as one who's shooting traditional military 'iron' sights would do.

At least that way that front aperture itself isn't getting in the way of your visual acuity trying to separate the target object from the background behind it.

Lenses added to either front or rear sight can do two things:

1) Adding a lens ahead of the front iris will make anything ahead of them look larger.

Helpful if your front sight is threaded, and you can find an insert that's threaded to fit it. .5 diopter's usually enough.

2) Lens added at the back, either in between your eyeball and the rear iris or less commonly in front of it, will help you see your front sight more clearly. It has to be of a power intended to correct your sighting eye's inability to focus properly on near-distance objects, that front sight in other words. You want your sighting eye as relaxed as possible when it's focusing on that front sight image. Otherwise they're a waste of money.

Lenses added over your shooting eye - in the manner of shooting glasses - will help most with your eye imaging that front sight. That, after all, is what you want to see clearly enough to know whether it's centered up on your target object.

 

[steve123]

If you're not going to shoot targets, its probably not worth spending the money. Target irons are very expensive and very fragile. The old steel rpa sights like the ones from the m24 can take an insert and might even take a front diopter.
If the rear iris is adjustable crank it shut as much as possible. You want minimal light coming in your eye. The gehmann 510 is good for a rear iris.

Thanks.

True, I don't want to spend a huge amount on sights because this is just for fun.

I think I do have the iris cranked all the way in but I forgot to check it last weekend. Lining the front and back sights up is easier for me if I have some light showing around the outside of the front sight, well I need to revisit these and check.

 

[steve123]

Do you wear glasses now? When was your last eye exam? Do you wear glasses to drive, or read a newspaper (what are those??) or work with your computer?

Seeing objects you're aiming at, with 'match' sights - two small, round apertures - will be an exercise in frustration under anything but the best possible conditions. That's not what they're designed to be used for, that's nothing like the sight picture seen when your target is a black disc against a lighter, plain background field.

If your goal is to continue down this road I suggest you look for an insert that presents a post image in your front sight, upon which you can place the object you're targeting, as one who's shooting traditional military 'iron' sights would do.

At least that way that front aperture itself isn't getting in the way of your visual acuity trying to separate the target object from the background behind it.

Lenses added to either front or rear sight can do two things:

1) Adding a lens ahead of the front iris will make anything ahead of them look larger.

Helpful if your front sight is threaded, and you can find an insert that's threaded to fit it. .5 diopter's usually enough.

2) Lens added at the back, either in between your eyeball and the rear iris or less commonly in front of it, will help you see your front sight more clearly. It has to be of a power intended to correct your sighting eye's inability to focus properly on near-distance objects, that front sight in other words. You want your sighting eye as relaxed as possible when it's focusing on that front sight image. Otherwise they're a waste of money.

Lenses added over your shooting eye - in the manner of shooting glasses - will help most with your eye imaging that front sight. That, after all, is what you want to see clearly enough to know whether it's centered up on your target object.

Thanks for the detailed reply, it was very informative!

I just got a new set of glasses and a new prescription last week. I do use +2 reading glasses right now on the computer and also a mild-ish prescription for seeing far.

I experimented with front posts in other rifles but they have been too wide for the smaller targets I've been shooting at. Also experimented with different larger sized front sight apertures, for whatever reason I see more error with centering up on small targets meaning I seem to miss more. This small insert makes centering up easy BUT!!! it's hard to find and also see a small target, which I'm okay with taking the time and effort to do. Compromises... just deciding which works better for me...

Am I right in assuming that if I found a thinner post front insert (does anybody know if some thin post inserts exist for old Redfields???) for that it'd be best to just use my new glasses with them set at the correct place to take full advantage of the progressive part of the lens?? Or possibly a better option is go back to the eye doctor and have a special pair made up for the length of the front sight from my eye??

Or if I want to use a front sight aperture it'd be best to get a +.5 lense so I can make out the target better?? I'm leaning this way because my main problem is the rock or steel is kinda undefined, ha I was shooting at a bush about the same size as the rock mistakenly till my friend behind the spotter and I figured out what the problem was.

 

[spclark]

I experimented with front posts in other rifles but they have been too wide for the smaller targets I've been shooting at. Also experimented with different larger sized front sight apertures, for whatever reason I see more error with centering up on small targets meaning I seem to miss more.

No surprise there! Target shooters spend a lot of time and energy finding the right size aperture to use for different conditions. There are adjustable ones that can tailor the opening for use at different distances, lighting conditions, that help us get our shots centered up.

Usually folks new to match sights tend to use a front opening that's too small, which will cut down on the amount of light reaching our sighting eye, which causes eye fatigue after a few rounds are fired, which then makes focusing on the front sight harder... a vicious circle that can spoil your day as your visual acuity degrades during a string of fire or an afternoon's match.

This small insert makes centering up easy BUT!!! it's hard to find and also see a small target, which I'm okay with taking the time and effort to do.

True enough but beware of that eye fatigue creeping in. You want your sighting eye as relaxed as possible when on the rifle. Having to fight between focusing on the front sight aperture itself while also centering up on your target object AND trying to separate that from a background against which it has little contrast makes for eye strain the longer you hold on a target.

Am I right in assuming that if I found a thinner post front insert (does anybody know if some thin post inserts exist for old Redfields???) for that it'd be best to just use my new glasses with them set at the correct place to take full advantage of the progressive part of the lens?? Or possibly a better option is go back to the eye doctor and have a special pair made up for the length of the front sight from my eye??

Yes there are post inserts for old Redfields, but they can take time to find. And yes, a thinner one might be just the ticket for you. I started shooting after Redfields had become less popular so where to look isn't something I can offer much help with so maybe try posting questions here or on other target shooting forums about where they might be found.

But then there's always a good search engine! I habituate to Google, which brought me these just now:

http://stores.leeshavergunsmithing.com/front-sight-insert-cards/

https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=315113

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Redfield-I...998152?hash=item48c8b5ba08:g:FScAAOSwjCVc1hFs

So they're out there! Good luck!

As for glasses: generally it's not usually helpful to use progressives for shooting. Lenses made this way will fool you into thinking you've got your eye centered up in the rear aperture when in fact it's not. Shooting glasses, or even just one lens in front of your aiming eye, selected for a single focal length (maybe even with astigmatism correction for that eye!) is a better option. That way the entire lens is 'correct' for the distance you're trying to focus on.

And as to that distance: for our purposes you want your eye to focus on a point roughly twice as far from your eye as that front sight is on your rifle. Called the 'hyperfocal distance' it's a compromise between focusing hard on the front sight and focusing down range on your target. The idea beig when you close down your rear aperture, the front sight will become clearer to your eye as the sight's iris decreases in size due to the 'depth of field' effect of the decreasing aperture size. At the same time the target image becomes clearer for the same reason.

Too small an aperture though leads to less light and eye fatigue so you need to find the sweet spot dependent on conditions at the time you're aiming. Why apertures are made to be adjusted.

Or if I want to use a front sight aperture it'd be best to get a +.5 lense so I can make out the target better??

Probably a good lace to start, yes. Remember the lens goes in front of your front sight aperture, otherwise it can affect how your eye achieves proper focus at that front sight distance or just in front of it.

 

[steve123]

Man SP, you should write an article on this stuff, you kinda did, very good, I especially appreciate those links in this post!

That'd be a great place to start by ordering the Shaver inserts and try out those fine posts.

I think it's up hill from here and thank you once again!

 

[damascusdave]

I am 67 and through a very satisfying change in vision am able to shoot iron sights again as I did 40 years ago. The problem is although my vision is fine my ability to focus at different distances shows the full 67 years of eye wear.
I was going to start trying some sighting options for my Model 94 with semi buckhorn. Thanks to reading this thread I just decided to leave well enough alone and simply pass on anything but ideal shots on game.
Ten years ago the thought of shooting with anything but a scope would have seemed ridiculous. Fact is I am very lucky man.

 

[spclark]

Man SP, you should write an article on this stuff, you kinda did, very good, I especially appreciate those links in this post!

That'd be a great place to start by ordering the Shaver inserts and try out those fine posts.

I think it's up hill from here and thank you once again!

You're welcome sir!

As for writing... (I spend much of my time answering questions from folks looking to do stuff they've never tried before (part-time in a TrueValue will have that effect) I'm only spitting back what others have led me to understand since I took up this sport. The sights / irises / visual stuff though comes from an earlier hobby-then-career as a photographer, where it seriously affects your ability to achieve the stuff you know you want to if'n you don't know how already.

Do come back here once you've tried a few things, see if anything we've been discussing has the desired effect, OK? We ALL learn by the feedback from others.

 

[spclark]

I am 67 and through a very satisfying change in vision am able to shoot iron sights again as I did 40 years ago. The problem is although my vision is fine my ability to focus at different distances shows the full 67 years of eye wear.
I was going to start trying some sighting options for my Model 94 with semi buckhorn. Thanks to reading this thread I just decided to leave well enough alone and simply pass on anything but ideal shots on game.
Ten years ago the thought of shooting with anything but a scope would have seemed ridiculous. Fact is I am very lucky man.

I just turned Grand Senior this year according to the NRA. Didn't take up this rifle stuff until 2003 & that was with a service rifle, your basic match grade AR-15, 20" barrel & iron sights.

Needless to say that didn't last too long, given the challenges of sight radius+54-year-old myopic eyes.

Never cared much for optics though, and since they weren't allowed back then for what's called Course Shooting (NRA high power, 3P) I learned a lot about what needs to happen before acceptable scores can be achieved with match sights.

I don't do much course shooting anymore (maybe a match a year?) as my interests are more in the prone / long range direction. Still with match sights. Shot my first mid-range match this morning, 600 yards. Cleaned one 20-shot stage, 200-10x. Another was a disaster, the last two were pretty close - save for a cross-fire (10, on the target to the right of the one I SHOULD have shot on) when it started to drizzle a little & the wind picked up.

Another 80 rounds tomorrow. Chance to do better.