Rigby would like to know your caliber preference(s) for a Highland Stalker model without iron sights

What caliber(s) would you like to see offered in a Rigby Highland Stalker without iron sights?

  • Total voters
    416
Ontario Hunter said:
Interesting. Why would Rigby want to offer a stalking rifle without even the option of iron sights? Save a bit of money? With the increased popularity of present return-to-zero quick detach rings I think retaining the option of iron sights, at least the front sight, makes more sense. I primarily hunt with optics but in bad weather or very rough/steep terrain I will remove the scope and switch to irons.

If economy is the objective, I would suggest tapping the receiver for traditional scope bases, plug them with blind screws, and include a ramped brass bead front sight minus hood. If the front sight ramp is high enough, a quick detach ghost ring rear sight can be attached to rear scope base as needed. Or a red dot sight (which would not require front sight).

30-06 will always be tops for a stalking rifle.
Click to expand...
I have to agree. I would want the iron sights even if I had no intention of ever removing the scope. It's part of the classic look of the Rigby rifle. They are beautiful and superbly functioning rifles. That being said I most likely will never own one. Every time I look at one I see the price and think to myself, there's another buffalo hunt, or two, or maybe even three depending on how many upgrades are involved.
 
I would not buy a Rigby without iron sights. I have used the irons/bolt peep on my Highland Stalker and Mama's London Best more than once for nostalgia reasons.

Safe shooting
 
Sabre said:
People are upset by having more options?
Click to expand...

I don't think people are upset by having more options. I think a lot of people (me included) have a very fixed idea of what the premier English custom rifles should look like and taking away one of the defining elements (i.e. the iron sights) lessens that nostalgic image of "perfection". I think that Rigby has done such a good job of establishing the Highland Stalker as a particular type of rifle that modifications are bound to create some strong opinions.

If you buy a nice beautiful red Ferrari and decide to paint it brown and add a trailer hitch, then is the response "Yea! More options" or is it "You ruined it!"? It's a judgement based on personal taste whether you think those changes are an improvement or not. The more iconic the item is, the stronger the opinions are probably going to be.

It might be as simple as adding a new optics-only model to the lineup and giving it a new name that invokes the idea of shooting at a distance (instead of a "stalking" rifle). For example, no one expects to see iron sights on a rifle with "Alpine" as part of its name. That doesn't change anything being offered or discussed here. It is simply marketed as a new product instead of a modification to a classic icon.
 
IvW said:
300 H&H
Click to expand...
I personally cannot imagine this 300 H&H without its iron sights!

But you do have good taste in cartridges, lol. ;)

IMG_5263.jpg
 
Sabre said:
I'm confused about the reactions here. People are upset by having more options?

If you wouldn't want one without iron sights, I get that, but you are upset some people might have the option to get it without iron sights?
Click to expand...
odonata said:
I don't think people are upset by having more options. I think a lot of people (me included) have a very fixed idea of what the premier English custom rifles should look like and taking away one of the defining elements (i.e. the iron sights) lessens that nostalgic image of "perfection". I think that Rigby has done such a good job of establishing the Highland Stalker as a particular type of rifle that modifications are bound to create some strong opinions.

If you buy a nice beautiful red Ferrari and decide to paint it brown and add a trailer hitch, then is the response "Yea! More options" or is it "You ruined it!"? It's a judgement based on personal taste whether you think those changes are an improvement or not. The more iconic the item is, the stronger the opinions are probably going to be.

It might be as simple as adding a new optics-only model to the lineup and giving it a new name that invokes the idea of shooting at a distance (instead of a "stalking" rifle). For example, no one expects to see iron sights on a rifle with "Alpine" as part of its name. That doesn't change anything being offered or discussed here. It is simply marketed as a new product instead of a modification to a classic icon.
Click to expand...
I like the idea better of a different lineup in the HS family . Like highland stalker/
Plains stalker more long range ocused calibers and options.
Say 300wm-338 lapua size range

One thing id like to see is innovate with modern materials to keep the traditional materials and styles relavent but discretely. Of wich i have a great many ideas but .02 is worth exactly that lol.

Id
 
Another mention for the 300 H&H. Hmm… now someone may want to order a pair in .300 and .375! Make not having the sights optional :) As above, more will want the sights than not for the reasons mentioned. While we are at it, how about the choice of a longer barrel -say 26 for some of these calibers? Thinking pre- or between the wars configuration. Or maybe make a limited run of classic calibers each year (e.g., .318, .333).
tarbe said:
I personally cannot imagine this 300 H&H without its iron sights!

But you do have good taste in cartridges, lol. ;)

View attachment 791213
Click to expand...
That’s outstanding.
 
grand veneur said:
I vote for the cartridge 300 Winchester Magnum, because in my opinion, it is well-suited for hunting light game to non-dangerous heavy game, for which this kind of Stalking Rifles are very well suited.

I own a David Lloyd rifle and for this reason I like such rifles.
Click to expand...
I voted this too for the same reasons…
I was actually quite surprised this was the #1 response
I thought this was an outlier opinion
 
I think the question should have been “ would you BUY a HS without sights ? And, if so, what cartridge would you want it chambered in ?”

I already own a HS in ‘06 . I’d like another in 9.3 x 62…. But it would need iron sights!

But, to answer your question as asked..300 Win Mag.
 
A traditional firearms manufacturer is allowed to offer its customers somewhat more modern concepts over time. That has never harmed the image of a maker. If the majority of the great British firms had not done that over the years, we would still be hunting with hammer guns.

A rifle without open sights also has a long-standing tradition. A good example is the cartridge 300 H&H Magnum which became popular 1935 thanks to the rifle of Ben Comfort.

comfort.jpg

www.americanrifleman.org

An Official Journal Of The NRA | Ben Comfort’s Wimbledon Cup Rifle Comes Home

One of the most important rifles used in NRA’s National Matches has been reunited with the family of a remarkable rifleman named Ben Comfort. And the rifle still really shoots.
www.americanrifleman.org www.americanrifleman.org
 
Last edited:
Simple answer is to buy what you want! For a highland stalking rifle for modern use, the ability to fit a moderator is essential. The presence of open sights interferes with that to some degree, either by limiting moderator choice to end of barrel rather than over the barrel designs, or by preventing the threading from being completed entirely. What I would regard as being essential is for the thread to be covered with an invisible end cap so that the lines of the barrel are preserved.
I cannot imagine a situation where when hunting on the hill in Scotland the open sights would be used so they are an irrelevance. Just my opinion obviously!
 
SStomcat said:
@VertigoBE -Respectfully, Sir, in your previous post you described it as a matter of personal taste. In this post, however, you seem to suggest that having a proper understanding of what constitutes a stalking rifle is also important.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point, but those two positions seem slightly difficult to reconcile. Surely, if the choice is ultimately one of personal preference, there should be some room for different interpretations of what makes a rifle “proper” for stalking.
Click to expand...
Hello @SStomcat ,

I'm not sure I truly follow the previous and second post? I only posted once in this thread.

Obviously, a specific setup of a rifle is a deeply personal choice. That is for everyone to decide for themselves. However in this case @RIGBY asked the open question if and which caliber they should offer without iron's. My opinion (as you know everyone has one) is that both to my personal preferences, as well as in generally the market, I would guess that someone that is considering purchasing specifically a new Rigby rifle, is doing so because of the more traditional designs elements of their rifles. Wood stock, iron sights, quick detach scope, classic English lines, etc.

So in my opinion, the market for Rigby rifles without iron sights will be much thinner, than in general rifles without iron sights. Choosing for a Rigby, over a Blaser R8, Sauer, Tikka, Winchester, Mossberg, etc. which often come without iron sights, is a very conscious choice for a more traditional rifle. And traditional rifles usually come with iron sights.

Also the value afterwards I can see getting a hit. Where a modern Rigby in .275 with iron sights and a decent piece of wood, might fetch 8KEUR in the second hand market, for example a modern Rigby in .300WM without iron sights (and a lower grade of wood to keep with the cost cutting) will likely only fetch 3/4 of that.

I'm not saying it is wrong to have such preference. I just do not see if there would be many orders for a non-iron sighted rifle. It is like ordering a new Porsche, but with standard steel rims. Or going to a fine restaurant and only ordering water, no wine. Can you? sure.

I'm sure someone out there in the world is dreaming of a Rigby rifle with a polymer stock too. But there are so many other brands, rifles already out there that cater to this. At much cheaper cost no less.

Anyway just my opinion.

V.
 
VertigoBE said:
Hello @SStomcat ,

I'm not sure I truly follow the previous and second post? I only posted once in this thread.

Obviously, a specific setup of a rifle is a deeply personal choice. That is for everyone to decide for themselves. However in this case @RIGBY asked the open question if and which caliber they should offer without iron's. My opinion (as you know everyone has one) is that both to my personal preferences, as well as in generally the market, I would guess that someone that is considering purchasing specifically a new Rigby rifle, is doing so because of the more traditional designs elements of their rifles. Wood stock, iron sights, quick detach scope, classic English lines, etc.

So in my opinion, the market for Rigby rifles without iron sights will be much thinner, than in general rifles without iron sights. Choosing for a Rigby, over a Blaser R8, Sauer, Tikka, Winchester, Mossberg, etc. which often come without iron sights, is a very conscious choice for a more traditional rifle. And traditional rifles usually come with iron sights.

Also the value afterwards I can see getting a hit. Where a modern Rigby in .275 with iron sights and a decent piece of wood, might fetch 8KEUR in the second hand market, for example a modern Rigby in .300WM without iron sights (and a lower grade of wood to keep with the cost cutting) will likely only fetch 3/4 of that.

I'm not saying it is wrong to have such preference. I just do not see if there would be many orders for a non-iron sighted rifle. It is like ordering a new Porsche, but with standard steel rims. Or going to a fine restaurant and only ordering water, no wine. Can you? sure.

I'm sure someone out there in the world is dreaming of a Rigby rifle with a polymer stock too. But there are so many other brands, rifles already out there that cater to this. At much cheaper cost no less.

Anyway just my opinion.

V.
Click to expand...

And as an add-on to this:
Every option a product maker adds to their product range, can be a positive thing. It evolves the product so it becomes better over time. But it also comes with a negative side, where every additional option, means an additional complexity, less optimized stocks of components, more differences in production lines, etc.

I would personally prefer to see the revival of the traditional rifle to continue, by more democratic price points over time, due to efficiency gains in production. Building 100 identical rifles is much cheaper than building 100 "almost identical" rifles.

If Rigby starts offering rifles without iron sights, it means at the very least increasing of their stock of barrels, now for each caliber 2 versions. This capital cost must be carried and reflected in overall cost of business and price points. But now also there is a danger of incorrectly building a rifle for someone, without irons when there should have been or vice versa. And let alone of less efficient production, because now each barrel will need to be matched to the rest of the rifle throughout the production process. There cannot be any mixing up. This will slow everything down. For every additional option you have, your production becomes less and less able to be fully optimized. Cost remains high.
 
All my hunting rifles have mechanical sights, and QD mounts.
This was difficult question for me.

Generally, I am of the firm opinion that in case something goes wrong with scope, or you get to extreme close range situation, a hunter will need mechanical sights.

Non iron sight frenzy came with appearance of Weatherby rifles, and long range hunting in the time when there was no range finders and they needed as long as possible point blank range.

It has also proven very welcome to gun shop owners and industry.

Because, once you enter the gun shop and buy the rifle without iron sight, you must buy some scope and mounts.

It also reduces rifle production costs to build a rifle without iron sights and will reduce man working hours to install, check and zero iron sights.

Win win situation for factories and guns shop owners.

Rifles without iron sights seam to be very popular in united states, more then in Europe.

Having said that, i voted for 300 win mag, and 338 win mag.

Longer range calibers.

With longer point blank range.
 
@RIGBY
I own a Highland Stalker in .30-06 and think the existing configuration is excellent. I don’t think Rigby buyers want a Highland Stalker without iron sights. The original .300 Win Mag Highland Stalker Magnum was launched without them, and I note that the current Magnum has since returned to traditional iron sights.

Rather than changing the Highland Stalker configuration, I’d much rather see the existing rifle retained as it is, with a broader range of larger-calibre offerings.
 
The vast majority of hunters use in countries where it is alloved suppressors on their barrels. That is why it is not a bad idea for Rigby to offer a rifle without open sights. Such rifles also need to be offered with a threaded muzzle for a suppressor. The only question is which clientele Rigby aim to reach with such rifles. Those financially strong enough might be more in my opinion inclined to have classic rifles built with open sights. I don't have the figures, but Rigby will know whether there is a market for upper class rifles without open sights.
 
grand veneur said:
The vast majority of hunters use in countries where it is alloved suppressors on their barrels. That is why it is not a bad idea for Rigby to offer a rifle without open sights. Such rifles also need to be offered with a threaded muzzle for a suppressor. The only question is which clientele Rigby aim to reach with such rifles. Those financially strong enough might be more in my opinion inclined to have classic rifles built with open sights. I don't have the figures, but Rigby will know whether there is a market for upper class rifles without open sights.
Click to expand...
From what I can tell from the website, all iron-sighted Highland Stalkers have the option to have the muzzle end threaded. And due to the Rigby design of the front sight, a little set back behind the muzzle end, there is no interference when adding a suppressor. With a nice flush cap screwed on when the suppressor is not attached. So removing the iron sights, would only be an added value for over-the-barrel suppressors.

see here, option of only threading, and including the suppressor:
1788948051632.png
 
Personally I prefer all my rifles to come equipped with iron sights. Preferably peep sights. A gun without sights is like a beagle without a nose, useless when needed. Just because American companies follow economy over function doesn’t mean the preeminent rifle manufacturer in the world should follow such stupidity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 1044 more.
Total: 278,936 (members: 1,094, guests: 277,842)

Forum statistics

Threads
70,066
Messages
1,563,304
Members
166,790
Latest member
AlisonGwin
 

 

 

Proudly sponsored by

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

haileybale53
haileybale53
Bright Path Acupuncture & Functional Medicine is a healing center that focuses on blending traditional acupuncture techniques with modern functional medicine practices. Their goal is to support patients in achieving optimal health by addressing the root causes of their health issues.
•••
A
autofire wrote on Dr Ray's profile.
Hi Dr. Ray, I will be in Cooktown from Oct 16 to Oct 23 fishing Lizard Island Black Marlin Tournament.

I have several "slack" days after fishing before I head for stay in Sydney and Fiji.

Do you have any recommendations for 1 or 2 day hunt near Cooktown?

I've hunted both DG and PG in 4 different countries in Africa.
Thank you,
Bob
•••
A
Alex Sniper wrote on Bynotic's profile.
Good morning. I see that you had a Sauer 202 for sale for $3,000. Did you sell it at that price?
I have one for sale as well. I listed it (on here ) at $3,000 as well. Is the price high, low or right where it should be?

Thanks. Alex. [redacted] in case you want to call me to discuss further. I appreciate your time help and support.
•••
The Don
The Don
I broke my cherry, August 2026, 41" Cape, hooked for life.
•••
S
Schaapen
Member of the South African Hunters and Game Conservation Association
•••

Share this page

 
Top