Iron Sight Accuracy Expectations?

J

Josh Smith

Moderator
Hello,

I am wondering what kind of accuracy expectations you folks have from your iron-sighted rifles? Any type, any era.

With handloads, I'm getting consistent sub-2" groups at 100 yards (maybe a shade over; I used a GPS to measure), and, at times, I get a cluster of three with two close fliers. Still working on that.

I've not used a lead sled or anything; my shooting is strictly front rest only, and my eyesight in my aiming eye runs around 20/40, so I'm sure the rifle is capable of touching the holes consistently.

Thanks!

Josh
 
Short, version--you 'should' be able to get the same accuracy with iron sights as you do with a scope (as you have done) IF:

-You can see what you're shooting at!
-You can get a consistent hold, and a consistent sight picture.

In practice, that's harder to do with iron sights at long range, than it is with a scope.

When I'm shooting an 12" bullseye at 200 yards, I can see it, and can get a consistent sight picture. I can get good groups under those circumstances.

If I were trying to hit a 4" bull at that distance, I couldn't even see it. Prairie Dogs at 200 yards with iron sights? Probably barely possible for someone with exceptional eyes. .
 
Iron sights will not affect accuracy, though they may affect marksmanship. In other words, the gun shoots the same. What is being influenced is how well you can use the sights to hit what you need to hit.

Finer iron sights are easier to shoot accurately than some of the more blunt combat sorts of sights on some guns, but finer sights can be more difficult to use quickly in a combat situation.

Some people can shoot well with the worst of iron sights. Not me.

If you are getting sub 2" groups at 100 yards with iron sights, you are doing quite well. Many of us don't even see well enough to be able to do that even if it is possible.

Never in my life have I heard of measuring groups with GPS.
 
This might sound weird but I could/can shoot the same groups (3/4" at 100) with my 3-9 (set at 9) as I now can with my 4-16 (set at 16). It's just getting a rest that keeps the sight from wandering around on the bull (IMHO).
 
Not sure about benchrest groups, but as far as practical accuracy at reasonable ranges, iron sights have done the job for a long while..... my own rifle started with iron sights, and my Grandfather only put a scope on it when his vision began failing him in his last years.

Short, version--you 'should' be able to get the same accuracy with iron sights as you do with a scope (as you have done) IF:

-You can see what you're shooting at!
-You can get a consistent hold, and a consistent sight picture.
Click to expand...

True dat.

As far as Grandpa's practical accuracy- it took him a while to learn to find the target in the scope quickly, but he could shoot ........with practice, he was just as fast and dead on with the glass as he was with the irons.
 
Optics help you see better. How well you shoot with irons really depends on several factors. Your eye sight and the quality of the iron sights play a big role.

With me pulling the trigger I can shoot ALMOST as well out to 100 yards with good quality iron sights as I can with a scope. As long as the target is in good light. Beyond 100 yards I cannot see the target as well, so my groups open up and I can now see and shoot much better with optics.

The same is true in poor light. In a hunting situation where the game is in shadows, or right at sunup or sundown I simply cannot see either the sights or target nearly as well with the irons. This is true at even very close range.
 
As I mentioned on the other forum:

Rifle don't care if it has irons or scopes. Its the shooter. I've seen some dern good scores with irons.

Back when I was shooting for the guard, I shot a Model 70 300 WM at 1000 yards in Any Rifle-Any Sight and Any Rifle Iron Sights. Almost always my iron sight scores beat my scope scores.

IN checking my old score books, my best 1000 yard match was fired with a M14 Service Rifle.
​
 
I've put three rounds touching each other at 100 yards with my brother's Saiga in 7.62x39. That was with iron sights. using yugo surplus ammo...
 
Rifle don't care if it has irons or scopes. Its the shooter. I've seen some dern good scores with irons.
Click to expand...

Obviously, you weren't watching me shooting a rifle with iron sights! :D

The problem for many of us is simple. If we can't precisely aim in the exact same place for each shot from a given position/distance, say 100, 200, 300 yards or whatever distance you like for rifles, then it is unreasonable to expect the shots to have a reasonable change to go to the same destination.

Magnified optics help many of us overcome this problem by letting us see the same point of aim each time, with more clarity than with our naked eyes, aim at it with more precision, and hence produce better results.

As you say, the rifle don't care.
 
If we can't precisely aim in the exact same place for each shot from a given position/distance,
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with iron sights vs scope. If you can't "precisely aim" an any given range/position its not the sights fault.

it is unreasonable to expect the shots to have a reasonable change to go to the same destination
Click to expand...

Why, how a bullet gets to the destination is is based on where the gun is pointed. Iron sights can be adjusted just like scopes. you move from 100 to 200 or 300 you simple adjust your sights accordingly.

Magnified optics help many of us overcome this problem by letting us see the same point of aim each time
Click to expand...

In coaching we call that a "crutch". You want to see the point of aim each time, PRACTICE.
 
I have a 91/30 with iron sights and a pair of Remington .22 with scopes. Like others have mentioned, I find that the challenge with the iron sight is staying consistant with the sight picture. At 100 yard the front post takes up a LOT of room on the target even with good eyes (something not all of us enjoy). Scopes will not improve how my technique affects my shooting but they sure help me see where I'm pointing the barrel better.
 
kraigwy, I think what he means is that for some of us it's hard to break out the target, period, past a certain distance. So, picking the same aim point on that target is going to be luck, to an extent.

Not being sarcastic, do you have some good way to consistently pick the same spot on a silhouette target that you can't see all that well?
 
the front post takes up a LOT of room on the target
Click to expand...

Thats a good thing if you learn how to take advantage of it. You can use the front post as a range finder.

Measure your front sight, lets say its .076 inches. Now if you know the size of your target, lets say 12 inches, you can estimate the distance. So your front sight exactly covers the 12 inch target, divide 12 by .076 and it gives you 158 yards (rounded) if its twice the size of your front target then its 318 yards, etc etc.

It works just like Mill Dots, we used this in Sniper Schools uning M1C/Ds before the days of Mil Dot Scopes and laser range finders, With practice you can get pretty good.

Side note, the average front sight on the M1 is .076. It covers the E-Silhouette target at 250 yards. The E-Silhouette target is the same width as the average person. This is where the army came up with the 250 BSZ for the M1.
 
Scopes will not improve how my technique affects my shooting but they sure help me see where I'm pointing the barrel better.
Click to expand...

I think that is true. I had much better vision when I was 25 than I do now at almost 70.

The scope allows me to put the crosshair on the target more precisely.

I like shooting with irons and even shoot some red dot sights with no magnification but there is no question that some are blessed with very good depth perception.

It is said that General Chuck Yeager could see 50 caliber bullets in flight.

I can't.

Geetarman:D
 
When I was a kid, and a terror on sparrows, I followed the path of BB's with my eye and adjusted my elevation and windage as necessary. As a slightly older kid, of 12 or 14, I could see the bullet as a receding dot from a 22 short, but couldn't really track it. I was an iron sight only guy, even as the rest of the family (dad and brothers) went to scopes. I made fun of them for a time. It was only when I finally had to admit that I just couldn't find the sights well enough in the dim light of dusk to place the bullet properly on deer that I got a 4X scope for my Marlin lever action. Then off to the USMC and iron sights on M14's, which was pretty easy once I figured out the sight picture. These days (in my mid-60's), I rely on scopes for most all my rifles. And even though I still don't wear glasses, I don't believe that my iron sight marksmanship could match my scope sight results, now or way back then.
 
Side note, the average front sight on the M1 is .076. It covers the E-Silhouette target at 250 yards. The E-Silhouette target is the same width as the average person. This is where the army came up with the 250 BSZ for the M1.
Click to expand...

Kraig -

That's very cool, thanks for the history (and math) lesson. I'm a big believer in iron sights, much less to go wrong, no batteries, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top