TargetTalk

My son is just starting 3 Position shooting, and Ive been reading as much as possible to be able to help him excel at it. We purchased a Daisy 953 to get him started, but Im already looking for a replacement if he continues to enjoy it.

Ive read some negative comments about the diopter sights that come with the Daisy 888. Can anyone explain what the shortcomings with the sights are? Does the new 887 have the same sight and thus the same problems? Lastly, (if needed) where would I find a good replacement? I read somewhere about a Gamo site, but my searching on the web hasnt turned up anything yet.

Thanks for your help :)

Backlash..... this is the main problem with the Daisy sights.

By this I mean that here is not enough springloading / fine machining in the parts so that one can get consistent movement when changing directions in either windage or elevation.

We all get what we pay for .... remember this is sporter air rifle, not precision.

The stock sights that come with an 888 are sufficient to fire the Sporter National record ... I saw it done this past summer .... not even the Gamo look alikes ... the plastic, stock rear sight. But the shooter knew her sights well.

The Daisy Gamo look-alikes are made in china and some of these perform very well .... these are the sights you will get on the 753 and 887 rifles ... some have so much backlash they are very frustrating for the shooters. these rear sights (the last time I checked) are about $35 from Daisy.

A real spanish Gamo will run you about $110 and is preferred by my shooters, but they can be difficult to obtain (read sometimes very long lead times)

$0.02 from me .... use the stock sights until the shooter can shoot consistently above 500 in a 3x20 and then maybe think changing. I have two of my best shooters still using the stock 888 rear and front sights firing very consistent 550-560's. Change is bad for them ... preference counts.

Learning good basics of the positions and being able to shoot tight groups ( Don't care where they are, but just nice & tight) should be the primary focus for a beginner to intermediate shooter. If they have not achieved this, they probably will not be worried about the sights.

Also, when using lower quality sights remember the old rifleman's trick of always making your adjustment in the same direction.

For example, I always adjust up and right.

If you need to down three clicks, make a five click down then two up adjustment. Keeps what spring pressure there is more consistent. To go up, just go the correct number of clicks.

For right, just the correct number of clicks, but going left go two extra then back to the right those two.

Not a perfect solution, but it helps.

Pat is correct ... although we have found that on really crummy examples of these sights, the backlash is as much as eight clicks, and then the sight adjustment jumps 2-3 rings suddenly.

You can see this if you zero from a bench and then run the sights about 30 clicks left .... re zero so your shots are just touching the ouside of the 1 ring. (our 888/887 gamo and Gamo copies run about 2.85 clicks per ring)

Then on a fresh bull fire a starting shot, and adjust your sights 2 click to the right and fire another shot .... do this all the way back across the bull and you will notice this backlash jumping ... if you get real industrious, do the same thing in elevation ... if nothing else it will give the shooter a better appreciation of of the number of clicks per ring their rifle is setup for.

If you have a real nice set of sights the gaps will be pretty darn consistent

I need to search the threads but I recall that someone found a way to make these rear sights work better, but that it involved "fixing" the mechanism.

My reading of the rule listed below would say that any modification of the sights is not allowed.

4.2.6 Prohibited Modifications
Any alteration or modification of the external or internal dimensions of factory-manufactured parts of approved Sporter air rifles, or the substitution of factory-manufactured parts from other air rifles or the substitution of parts that were not manufactured by the original manufacturer, that are not specifically authorized by these rules is prohibited.

I shoot for myself not in competition, so the competition rules don't apply to me. I just want a decent rear sight that behaves the way a sight should. Is the 853 or Avanti Precision sight "fixable" w minimal cost. Or am I better off w the Gamo sight.

Another question, my 853 has the old front sight assembly; barrel weight and sight and a single unit. I would like to install the sight assembly with an interchangeable aperture. My 953 has a removable front sight where I can slide on a globe front sight. But looking at the pix of a 753, it seems that the front sight is integral with the barrel weight. Which would be the better way to go?

thanks

Since I'm coaching 4-H and it's a prohibited mod .... I've never bothered messing with a bad one. Give Brenzovich a call for a real Gamo and see what their lead time is ... they might just have some in stock.


On the front sight .... the 753 sight is what I personlly prefer as we can put standard 18mm apertures in it. You can order these from Daisy

Ive read those rules as well, and the conversation brings up an interesting question. What is the difference between "modification" and "repair"?

A sight that takes a number of clicks to move could be considered broken, and thus could be repaired. If I understand the spirit of the rule correctly, its to prohibit changes that would give an unfair advantage. Fixing a sight to make it preform somewhere close (definately not better) than the $100+ Gamo sight that is legal, would be within the intent of the rule.

Like I said though Im new to all this, and Im just drawing conclusions from the actual wording, and articles on the CMP site....actual interpretation of the rule may vary?

This may become more of an issue in the future. I just spoke with Brenzovich Firearms and was told that the Gamo sight was no longer available. He mentioned that Hammerli (sp?) went bankrupt, and therefore there would be no more Gamo diopter sights....ever.

If your sight is jumping you have abroken sight, not backlash. Backlash is the play between gear surfaces, and amounts to a small amount which can vary as the surfaces wear.

Repairing a broken sight to make it work properly is not outside the rules. I suspect you have either a screw with bunged up threads, or a bad nut that it goes thru. don't know if the parts area vailable from Daisy or not, but might be worth buying a few extras to swap parts.

I guess we're talking a bit of symantecs here .....

Interesting that about 3 of 5 new sights from Daisy should be considered broken.

I consider the whole issue a backlash problem as there are such poor machining tolerances and friction in the moving parts that significant "binding" (maybe that's a better description) takes place when moving the sight in the opposite direction.

My solution has been to order more sights than I need, and then return the ones that are (IMO) unuseable.

Adding parts and or modifying springs in the sights should be done with a bit of thought..... we've had to ask the council to specifically approve the modification of the trigger springs as some were reading the rules as though those were prohibited modifications..... (see the Oct 2007) "On The Mark" (p18)

I'd bet the machining is not keeping the adjusting screw in parrallel alignment with the groove the sight slides in. Binding sounds more like it, when you get lots of adjustment at once after several clicks.

I think I still have an old one around, and wil look at it. May just be simple fix (if allowed by the council).

On a side note here, the new sporter from Airforce that I saw at nationals had a very well made looking sight. I'm hoping that if it is a nice performer that the council will let us use them on the other sporter guns as well.

How do the ones from Air Arms compare? Since the T200 is an approved air rifle does that automatically mean that their sights can be used?

The T200 uses the Chinese "Gamo" copies I believe ... same as Daisy

I finally ordered and received a new 887 this week for my son (and myself). I havent had much chance yet to tinker with the sight to see if I got a "good" one or not. I did notice however that the sight allows very little light through it. Is that correct? Its so dim I have trouble making out the bull of a standard target at about 20 feet with normal indoor light (down our hallway and into the dining room).

The rear sight acts as an iris in a camera does, it helps improve the depth of field ....small is normal ..... you just need better lighting.

Most (indoor) ranges have very good light on the target. A few years ago we received a range grant that allwoed us to hang 1 300W halogen light above each target.

Many of our shoots in gyms will place a 300-500W halogen lamp on the floor about 8-10 feet back in front and between the target frames.

if you look in the rules, lighting is called out:

5.5.6 Lighting
Indoor ranges must have artificial illumination that provide the necessary amount of light without glare or distracting shadows on the targets or firing points. A minimum illumination of 1000 Lux on the targets is recommended. Targets must be illuminated evenly, with direct light on the target being highly recommended. It is recommended that the firing line area also be well illuminated.

For a complex set of reasons I am not going to go into here, I'm wondering if the front and rear sights from a Crosman 2000 (which look a lot like the Daisy Gamo copies) will fit the Daisy 953/853 rifles (including the front)?

Thanks!

Here you may have lucked out.

Crosman used to use original Gamo's.

They are perfectly legal and exactly the same sights