Iron sights vs 1x scope for hunting

[meek]

I haven't used either before but want to get a setup for close range hunting.

What do you guys think of iron sights vs a 1x scope?

pros / cons?

Cheers.

[schink]

I'd take a 1x scope or a dot scope no questions asked.

[Hercl]

Iron sights are fun, but I'd take a low-mag scope over them for my rifles.

In decent lighting their fine, more difficult as light diminishes though...

Using the multiple focal points of the front and back sight makes them slower too in my opinion.

[Manimal]

I find my eyes are the problem with iron sights too.

I notice even if I get a bit dehydrated it takes me a second longer to focus everything across irons.

I know that's my eyes and not the sights fault, but still... Don't have the same problem with a scope.

Just my 2c.

[reddog]

What about aperture sights don't you just look through the aperture , get the front sight on target and fire , without focusing on the rear aperture at all?

[Grrzrr]

What about aperture sights don't you just look through the aperture , get the front sight on target and fire , without focusing on the rear aperture at all?

That's right.

I suppose technically it's still competing for your eyes attention though and you have to look past it to find your front sight vs the reticle or dot being the only thing you see in a scope.

Probably several technical reasons why a scope is "better" but ultimately I'd say it's just personal preference.

[Member-Deleted]

With such a short scope you will probably have the end of the barrel in view, maybe a set of true glow sights would be the go.

[jeener]

I know I'm crap and using iron sights vs a scope.

I'm willing to admit that's likely shooter error and not a fault of the sights themselves though

[laflamme]

Your not alone. without a lot of practice with a given set of iron sights it will always be easier to use a dot scope. I prefer those wonderful things called 2x dot scopes, but i digress. It is just too hard to line up 3 things when compared to lining up 2 things. plus with the scope you have a lot better view of what you are shooting at. the limitations being that you are not seeing everything around your target because you are limited to scope field of view but with a 1x dot scope its so much faster to line up the target WITH MINIMAL EFFORT AND PRACTICE that it only makes sense. Keep in mind if you are willing to work at it for a 1000 rounds or so you will be faster without a scope than with it, but my eyes don't give the vision I had when I was 20 and my eyes were not that good then so for me 2-4x is just par for the course if I want to hit anything at 100m.

[Chronos]

The biggest advantage with a scope is that the target, be it paper of beast remains in focus.

When using any open sights its important you focus on the front sight. Not the rear. Not the target.

Aperture sights tend to be slow because your field of view is so small.

Realistically shooting a pig sized target at under 100m with iron sights should be a piece if piss, after all that's what they were designed for.

Chronos

[VICHunter]

It is just too hard to line up 3 things when compared to lining up 2 things...

I've found that iron sights work best only when pulling the rifle up to your shoulder into its natural/comfortable position matches your eye line for the iron sights.

If you shoulder the rifle then have to spend 1-2 seconds head bobbing to line up, that's when you may miss a shot.

In my experience anyway.

Between the two choices I'd opt for a 1x scope as well.