Back up Irons or a QD red dot

This is something that I have been chewing over for a while.

So, you're going to Africa or Alaska mainly to hunt non-dangerous game but you are aware you might have to deal with some large and cranky that can do you harm.

Rifle you are taking

.338, 9.3x62 or 375 (Pick Ruger, H&H or WM whatever you like first and last chambering)

You've picked a handy scope of something like a 1.5-10x42 or 1.7-13x42 if you're fancy and want a Swarovski. with a decent ballistic turret set up with your rifle and ammunition.
- I'm going with that kind of optic that as you might want to do something with more objective at dusk such as watching a watering hole / tree line or you see the kudu / moose you want to take at 300-400 yds and would welcome the magnification. This rules out your classic 1-4/5/6x24 Low power variable scope.

You're rifle is one of those new durable stainless steel and laminate jobs which doesn't come with iron sights. However, you would like a back up sighting system for 2 reasons:

1) Things go wrong in the bush
2) Perhaps something a little closer if you have to follow up or maybe deal with an unwelcome angry animal visitor that is large, equipped to do you harm and intent on doing so.

So, my question is:

a) Do you fix iron sights?
- Always on the gun
- Don't run out of battery
- Most solid kind regulated to your ammo
- If you fall and break optic, possible you might bend your sights too?

b) Carry a pre-zeroed red dot in a QD mount
- Easier to use for those of us with bad eye-sight
- Easier to zero (not regulated)
- Batteries can run out (Though given some of the battery lifes quoted this seems unlikely)
- Can be kept wrapped up in pack so possibly more protected on hunt than shoulder slung rifle mounted irons / optics
- Not always on gun so could in theory forget it

I reckon that there won't be much difference in cost of a trip, especially in the scheme of an Alaska / Africa trip.

So, what do you do folks? Those are just my musings, what do you think?

Scrummy

I am one of those that thinks that every rifle needs iron sights. They just do not look right without them for one thing. I have never used a red dot but if I did I think it would be on a home defense shotgun but not likely on a hunting rifle. Somewhere online I saw where someone had mounted a red dot or similar sight on a nice double rifle (might have been here), It turned my stomach. It is not just for dangerous game. I have them on .22s. The only rifle without open sights is my son's Tikka .270 and we are about to get some from NECG and have them installed. All of my scopes are in QD mounts that return to within a 1/2 inch of zero.

Scopes can be damaged, or just knocked of zero. But for me my eyes are such now that any moisture in the air starts to degrade my vision. Fog, mist, and rain make looking through optics very difficult. What is worse is that when light starts fading a scope no longer helps. When I was younger I could crank a scope down to low magnification and see too hunt a little longer. Not any more. Now I have to pull the scope with +_ half an hour of daylight remaining.

I generally keep the scope in my pack until I anticipate needing it or get set up on the stand. I hunt in some pretty thick stuff and do a lot of still hunting in the North Georgia mountains. If a shot at a bear/hog/deer presents itself I want to be ready. I have heard many say that a low power dangerous game scope is quicker that open sights. It is not for me.

Imo if you are hunting plainsgame and come about a dangerous situation, it's the pc's job to keep you both safe as you scurry up the nearest tree

As far as a backup scope, I don't really see the need for one. Maybe if you have a 2-7x sighted in for 100 yards and you are switching totally different locations for the day/week where you can slap on a 4-12x sighted for 200 yards...

If something is seriously wrong with your scope, then I would borrow a rifle. If you had iron sights you better range fire them again after a tragic scope incident.

curtism1234 said:

Imo if you are hunting plainsgame and come about a dangerous situation, it's the pc's job to keep you both safe as you scurry up the nearest tree

As far as a backup scope, I don't really see the need for one. Maybe if you have a 2-7x sighted in for 100 yards and you are switching totally different locations for the day/week where you can slap on a 4-12x sighted for 200 yards...

If something is seriously wrong with your scope, then I would borrow a rifle. If you had iron sights you better range fire them again after a tragic scope incident.

Click to expand...

I have yet to hunt in Africa. I have however hunted in grizzly country and amongst some pretty ferocious hogs. Whether I have a guide or not I want to be able to protect myself and not count on on someone else. Really good people that know what they are doing will fail sometimes, so it might be that just once they will need me to keep them safe.

For redundancy I prefer to take another rifle. That being said, all my DG big bores (.416, .458, .500) have NECG iron sights on them that I sight in at 25 yards.

My plains game rat guns (.308, .375) don't have iron sights.

@John Camp , what kind of optics are you using that don't help you see better in low light?

John Camp said:

I am one of those that thinks that every rifle needs iron sights. They just do not look right without them for one thing. I have never used a red dot but if I did I think it would be on a home defense shotgun but not likely on a hunting rifle. Somewhere online I saw where someone had mounted a red dot or similar sight on a nice double rifle (might have been here), It turned my stomach. It is not just for dangerous game. I have them on .22s. The only rifle without open sights is my son's Tikka .270 and we are about to get some from NECG and have them installed. All of my scopes are in QD mounts that return to within a 1/2 inch of zero.

Scopes can be damaged, or just knocked of zero. But for me my eyes are such now that any moisture in the air starts to degrade my vision. Fog, mist, and rain make looking through optics very difficult. What is worse is that when light starts fading a scope no longer helps. When I was younger I could crank a scope down to low magnification and see too hunt a little longer. Not any more. Now I have to pull the scope with +_ half an hour of daylight remaining.

I generally keep the scope in my pack until I anticipate needing it or get set up on the stand. I hunt in some pretty thick stuff and do a lot of still hunting in the North Georgia mountains. If a shot at a bear/hog/deer presents itself I want to be ready. I have heard many say that a low power dangerous game scope is quicker that open sights. It is not for me.

Click to expand...

You must use different optics than most, or have a unique eyesight issue. Quality optics extend shooting opportunities in fading light - particularly over iron sights - often by a significant margin. In Africa this is particularly valuable in a leopard blind at last light.

I second the notion of a quickly removable scope. All of my African rifles are so equipped. I prefer irons in a follow-up.

With respect to the OP, I can’t imagine trying to go through the drill of removing one set of optics and replacing with another for a follow-up. In my experience, simpler is always better, particularly in the field.

Red Leg said:

You must use different optics than most, or have a unique eyesight issue. Quality optics extend shooting opportunities in fading light - particularly over iron sights - often by a significant margin. In Africa this is particularly valuable in a leopard blind at last light.

I second the notion of a quickly removable scope. All of my African rifles are so equipped. I prefer irons in a follow-up.

With respect to the OP, I can’t imagine trying to go through the drill of removing one set of optics and replacing with another for a follow-up. In my experience, simpler is always better, particularly in the field.

Click to expand...

I just think it's an interesting idea.

Question: how much time are you imagining between shot and follow-up?

Say you shoot a buff and it turns and runs into cover. Do you wait and give it some time to stiffen up before you start to track? That would seem to be the time to top up the mag and check everything was where you wanted it to be. Change optic? Why not.

Just interested in your thoughts.

Scrummy

Scrumbag said:

@John Camp , what kind of optics are you using that don't help you see better in low light?

Click to expand...

This season I was using a Leupold VX3 4-12x44 AO and a Leopold VX1 3-9x40. The issue is not the optics. I have this problem with Tascos and Swaros. It is my eyes and I have not gotten a good explanation yet.

What I do, I take two scopes to Africa in QR mounts sighted in and ready. But, in the field if (it hasn’t happened in Africa yet!) a scope fails on a stalk, I would revert to the open sights. I practice with them as well as the scope, but my eyes no longer do well with them. Absolutely no long shots with open sights and my eyes.

All that explanation, but if your eyes are as failing as mine, I’d probably try the red dot and just see how well it would work and how quickly I could change it.

JMO, but these are decisions you will need to make for your own condition and situation. Best of luck determining what works best for you!

Ridgewalker said:

What I do, I take two scopes to Africa in QR mounts sighted in and ready. But, in the field if (it hasn’t happened in Africa yet!) a scope fails on a stalk, I would revert to the open sights. I practice with them as well as the scope, but my eyes no longer do well with them. Absolutely no long shots with open sights and my eyes.

All that explanation, but if your eyes are as failing as mine, I’d probably try the red dot and just see how well it would work and how quickly I could change it.

JMO, but these are decisions you will need to make for your own condition and situation. Best of luck determining what works best for you!

Click to expand...

Of course I am red / green color blind as well. Now if they make a blue dot I might look into it.

Scrumbag said:

I just think it's an interesting idea.

Question: how much time are you imagining between shot and follow-up?

Say you shoot a buff and it turns and runs into cover. Do you wait and give it some time to stiffen up before you start to track? That would seem to be the time to top up the mag and check everything was where you wanted it to be. Change optic? Why not.

Just interested in your thoughts.

Scrummy

Click to expand...

On a buffalo, depending on the terrain, most PH's go for an instantaneous follow-up - as in sprinting after the bull. They would much rather get another shot or two into him before he gets into really thick cover. They are usually down within the first fifty meters or you are in for a rodeo. In that situation you will be using what you brought to the dance, because there will be no time to take off a scope or put on another one.

I would differentiate that from what a I would call a deliberate follow-up where an animal has made it to cover and is likely wounded rather than dead. It seems to happen a lot with leopards. In that instance, a client would have time to switch out a scope for a red dot (assuming he didn't leave it in the truck, his tent, or his other pair pants.) At an inbound, wounded animal where the range will be close, I would personally prefer open sights where I can maintain total visibility of the animal with both eyes. I always shoot with both eyes open anyway - scope or open sights - but I would prefer simpler where the shot will be as much instinctive as aimed.

Hello Scrumbag,

Your question/s are valid.
Thank you for posting them.

Yours truly has lived in Alaska for almost 38 years now and I’ve hunted here many, many times.
Also, I have worked as a “Wildlife Guard” (primary concern is of course grizzly and polar bear), for perhaps 10 or more years, keeping Oilfield Workers, Scientists and Biologists from attacking the bears - lol.

However, Africa has only been my huckleberry 5 times.
In the big picture of African experiences, that equates to me being a rank beginner in Africa.
I do LOVE Africa with all my soul but, have so much yet to learn about it.

That said, I will share with you, what I have learned about sighting equipment thus far, in my relatively few visits to the Beloved Dark Continent.
The first time I hunted in Africa (2003?) was, to Namibia, perhaps the most “user friendly” country on earth, for people traveling with a rifle.

I brought a Professional Gunsmith built .300 H&H Mauser, on a 1950’s Fabrique National Model ‘98 Commercial Mauser action, loaded with 18o grain Nosler Partition bullets @ a little over 2800 FPS, from the muzzle.
It had a 25” Douglas barrel, double set triggers and a vintage 4x Zeiss scope, with standard cross wires, clamped in original / old style Talley lever rings, and old style Talley bases.
It also had a quarter rib with, multiple leaf rear sights.
The front sight was a banded affair, from NECG (New England Custom Gun) with, a large white (porcelain) bead.
Likewise, I brought a 6x Leupold scope, also in original / old model lever rings.

In those days, I wanted to be sure that I had all possible scenarios accounted for.
However, the 4x scope proved PERFECTLY adequate for ALL scenarios that I encountered, short range, medium range and long range.
I shot well with it.
This included a running steinbok, quite a few critters in between and a springbok, at a tic over 400 meters.

Nowadays, I never bring a spare scope.
I only rely on iron sights as my backup sighting equipment.
Same for hunting in Alaska.
In all fairness, I don’t hunt big game in Alaska any more, as it has become way too expensive.
Plus, my old pals commonly give to me, deer, caribou, black bear and moose meat each year.
So, I have become soft.

In regards to your idea of a “ballistic turret” ... my opinion is that, you should avoid it, as it is (again, in my grumpy old man opinion) nothing more than an unwanted distraction.
Install a 4x scope or, if you must, install a sturdy, low powered variable power scope, such as a 1.5 to 5 power scope, in sturdy/low rings and practice, practice, practice and then practice some more, from sticks.

Last but not least, avoid anything that has a battery in it, especially in Alaska.
My personal experiences with battery powered contraptions in Alaska is that they WILL fail you when you need them most.

In closing, I only want a simple scope, in seriously stout rings (I like Alaska Arms brand, lever rings, low over the bore) and iron sights as my backup, in the unlikely event of a scope failure.

PS:
Whatever equipment you settle on, I cannot stress enough the concept of: Practice from
shooting sticks (standing position).
Yes....practice, practice, practice and then practice some more.

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

Hi folks, interesting set of discussion here.

@Redleg, understand what you mean. I wasn't planning on firing and automatically switching optics. This would be more if it got into really thick stuff and there was some time coming up before going after (Fully believe in the principle of if the quarry requires shooting again you keep going whilst you can)

@Velodog, I agree sticks are important. Big part of deer stalking over here and my club has a couple of competitions you use them.

Had the red dot off the 9.3 the other day and was shooting the 9.3x62 at statics and 100yd running deer target

Scrummy

I live here in Africa, use a Ruger No1 in 375 H&H and recently acquired a Verney Carron in 375 Flanged Magnum, O/U double. The Ruger No1 wears a Leica 1-6.3i x24 red dot, the Verney is iron sight regulated to 50m with Norma PH 300gr. Ive taken zebra, warthog, impala and a nice buff bull with the Ruger, but all the practice at the range has swayed me to the Verney. On charging lion, jungle lanes, and just static targets the Verney outperforms the scoped Ruger, all the way out to 75m, which is my hunting imposed limit. Why? The Verney FITS exactly - shoulder it, cheek weld and bingo it is magically in the 50mm almost every time. I am sold on iron sights on a 'light double', just 7.5 pounds. Ive written a few snippets elsewhere on how this little 375 FL performed against a 500 double on accuracy and repeatability, and granted it isnt termed a stopper, but neither is a large bullet that misses the brain!