Iron sites or scope for deer hunting when and which you like better

[LJC]

If I know that I'm going to hunt areas where shots  are under 100 yards i like using iron sites over scope .  I'm just old fashioned I guess first guns I  shot when I was I kid only had iron sites on them I  just got use to them .

 

[BigVal]

Can't beat iron sites when I'm walking thick cover but from the stand even under 100 I prefer scope.

Edited October 2, 2016 by BigVal

[airedale]

If one has good vision there is nothing wrong with good quality open sights especially at shorter ranges. I have always prefered the so call peep type rear over a V-notch.  As my eyes have aged I have difficulty getting a good reliable sight picture in fading-dim lighting conditions so I have pretty much gone to scope sights on most of my rifles. Scopes will also offer somewhat more precise aiming through thick cover as you can see and pick out clear openings  to shoot through. If your shots are for the most part under 100 yards not much power is needed, personally I like 2.5X or 3X scopes because of their large field of view. I still do use open sights on all of my black powder rifles.

Al

Edited October 2, 2016 by airedale

[Buckmaster7600]

There isn't a time or a place where iron sights are faster or more precise than a low power scope. The military spent a few million dollars studying this in the early 2000's. The only time that sights could be better is foul weather. For me it's a 1-5 scope over iron sights. I hate high power scopes and only own 1 that is 9x and a couple 7x's every thing else is 1-4,5,or 6x


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pygmy]

You can't beat a 1.5 to 3X  scope for fast target acquisition at woods ranges...

I  shot many deer with my shotguns from 1965 until they made rifles legal here in Steuben and never used scope over 2.5X.

I have also  shot a lot of game with my rifles and  fixed 4X scopes at ranges out to 400 yards with no problems concerning target acquisition...I am not saying that a 4X scope is the BEST tool for long range shooting, but I am saying that it will get the job done at extended ranges and often is a better choice at "normal" ranges than higher powered scopes.

[Jeremy K]

No reason to use a scope under 100 yards unless you have bad vision, regardless if its low power scope or not.

[wolc123]

The problem with iron sights is that your eye can only focus at one distance at a time. Do you focus on the rear sight, the front sight or the target?  This gets a lot worse as range increases.   A good scope makes up for that with lenses.   Parallex can be corrected to make everything crystal clear at various ranges including the cross-hairs and the target.   The only time I prefer iron sights is for short range work (less than 50 yards) in foul weather conditions.       

[tommyc50]

not trying to be smart but like both see-thru mounts if you have problems w/ your scope you can still shoot w/ iron sites the only problem w/ the see-thru sights is you have to compasate for the scope being mounted higher on the gun

[ApexerER]

I will take a scope over iron sights any time...only question is what power I want...

[Buckmaster7600]

You can't beat a 1.5 to 3X  scope for fast target acquisition at woods ranges...
I  shot many deer with my shotguns from 1965 until they made rifles legal here in Steuben and never used scope over 2.5X.
I have also  shot a lot of game with my rifles and  fixed 4X scopes at ranges out to 400 yards with no problems concerning target acquisition...I am not saying that a 4X scope is the BEST tool for long range shooting, but I am saying that it will get the job done at extended ranges and often is a better choice at "normal" ranges than higher powered scopes.

I just wanted to add an extra like!

For those who say there is no reason for a scope under 100yds I'll say this. There is no reason not to have a scope under a 100yds and I could make a long list of reasons a scope is better for under 100yds.


As for see through mounts they are a solution to a problem that never existed. They don't provide proper stock weld while using the scope and make it very hard to focus on sights while looking through the tunnel. They also ruin your peripheral vision because of the tunnel. This total ruins the argument for having irons for fast shots because when fast shots happen you have to pick your hole before the deer is in it.

Thankfully there are many options for all of us to use but for those who have never tried a quality fixed 2.5x20 or a 1-4x20 scope for close up woods work I highly recommend it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GreeneHunter]

Love my Iron Sights !

[Jeremy K]

I like the iron over a scope under 100 yards , for me personally , its just easier to scan for on looking deer as im getting ready to make a shot . We hunt rather thick woods and it just works better with having limited shooting lanes . It has nothing to do with speed for me.

[bugsNbows]

13 hours ago, tommyc50 said:

not trying to be smart but like both see-thru mounts if you have problems w/ your scope you can still shoot w/ iron sites the only problem w/ the see-thru sights is you have to compasate for the scope being mounted higher on the gun

IMO, see-thru mounts are terrible. I'd always prefer a fixed 4x or a low power variable scope.

[chas0218]

I grew up shooting iron sights so I was used to them and out to 100 yards I didn't a scope. When I bought my rifle several years ago other than my .22 that was the only scoped gun I owned. I now have a scope on almost all my guns, not that I need it just because it takes the guess work out of longer shots. I like the variable zoom it allows me to utilize the effective range of the gun but the most important reasons for having one is the ability to aim quickly and humanely kill an animal. At 100 yards iron sights I could easily shoot a 4" group with my shotgun and sabots, with a scope it pulls it down to 1.5"-2"

Edited October 3, 2016 by chas0218

[LJC]

15 hours ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

 

I just wanted to add an extra like!

For those who say there is no reason for a scope under 100yds I'll say this. There is no reason not to have a scope under a 100yds and I could make a long list of reasons a scope is better for under 100yds.


As for see through mounts they are a solution to a problem that never existed. They don't provide proper stock weld while using the scope and make it very hard to focus on sights while looking through the tunnel. They also ruin your peripheral vision because of the tunnel. This total ruins the argument for having irons for fast shots because when fast shots happen you have to pick your hole before the deer is in it.

Thankfully there are many options for all of us to use but for those who have never tried a quality fixed 2.5x20 or a 1-4x20 scope for close up woods work I highly recommend it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Just wanted to add that another reason a I like iron sites for deer hunting under 100 yards  is . With scopes you always have to worry about if something has changed and bad weather or them fogging up even  tho I have scopes that are supposed to not fog up I  have had that happen anyway at times when using face masks in really cold weather .

Same with binoculars  .  Also for me personally just seems I can get on target faster at close range . I also just like having to carry less weight on my gun .

[Buckmaster7600]

Just wanted to add that another reason a I like iron sites for deer hunting under 100 yards  is . With scopes you always have to worry about if something has changed and bad weather or them fogging up even  tho I have scopes that are supposed to not fog up I  have had that happen anyway at times when using face masks in really cold weather .
Same with binoculars  .  Also for me personally just seems I can get on target faster at close range . I also just like having to carry less weight on my gun .

If you can get on target and fire a well aimed shot faster with irons than a low power scope than you are a rarity.

As for weight a low power scope weighs around 10oz I cut the extra barrel that I don't need off and it about evens it out.

The bad weather part is what it is with proper care I have never had a scope unusable in the woods but I did have a ghost ring peep freeze solid and was unusable.

Durability is a wash in my opinion. A quality scope is nearly bullet proof and so are iron sights. Both can be broken or have a screw come loose.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I have shot both but in the last 25 years I have had glass on all of my hunting rifles and shotguns for big game. I believe that once you get used to using a scope there is nothing that you cant do with iron sights that can't be done better with a scope. I had two buddies that HATED scopes becasue they were too hard to pick up deer, especially if moving. I worked with them one summer and they are scoped on all their guns now. Have the proper ring height, have the scope set so there is instant clear and full field of view and don't buy cheap glass. Practice staring at the target and bring the scope up and into that line of sight (even on moving animals) don't raise the gun/scope to your eye and then try to find the target. If that makes sense. 

 

And I know Pygmy will scold me but I like magnification...lol. 2-7, 3-9 (on most of mine) and on my '06 4-12

Pistols and Win94 are fixed 4

[LJC]

1 hour ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

 

 

If you can get on target and fire a well aimed shot faster with irons than a low power scope than you are a rarity.

As for weight a low power scope weighs around 10oz I cut the extra barrel that I don't need off and it about evens it out.

The bad weather part is what it is with proper care I have never had a scope unusable in the woods but I did have a ghost ring peep freeze solid and was unusable.

Durability is a wash in my opinion. A quality scope is nearly bullet proof and so are iron sights. Both can be broken or have a screw come loose.




 

 

 

 Except if you more interested in shaving weight off what your using .

Like in my case .

Scopes are definitely more popular these days . I was looking for a new light weight rifle not to long ago  and the one I wanted  you couldn't even get with iron sites would have to get a gunsmith to add them on . It seemed strange that  they would design a rifle to be super light like that and not have that as one of the options.

[Big John]

It is my opinion that everyone who learns to shoot a weapon should learn iron sites first be proficient with them first then move on to a scope. There are some instances where a scope can be a hindrance if the power is high and the target is real close.  

[turkeyfeathers]

5 minutes ago, Big John said:

 There are some instances where a scope can be a hindrance if the power is high and the target is real close.  

I learned to always have scope at lowest setting. You can dial it up if need be . If the critter is close you may not have the time or stealth not to be seen to dial it down.

[covert]

Peep sights for me please.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I believe that the other thing that gets overlooked when iron sights are only used, is just how shaky off hand shooting really is. I find that with a scope I really buckle down and get a steadier hold becasue every movement is magnified as well as the target. 

[growalot]

my bead

[growalot]

my bead

[Salmon_Run]

I like scopes for deer hunting, low power for the dense Adirondack woods and a higher power for the open farm fields of Western New York.

As I get older I find a scope is a little more clear and I don't have to wear my glasses. I do however, practice acquiring a target in my scope often (safely) and find that when I pull on target I am right on with a scope by use of repeated muscle memory.....