Rear Sight Question

dlindenbaum · Post by **dlindenbaum** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:42 pm

I have a new version Anschutz rear sight (7002 series). It does not have a threaded front opening in order to insert a tube extension as with the older anschutz sights. I am looking to extend the "tube" in order to have a narrower field of view. Does anybody know of a quick fix for this? I know Anschutz makes a complicated rear sight extension that replaces the front housing, but wanting a different remedy.

Dennis

B.T.Carstensen · Post by **B.T.Carstensen** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:59 am

Dennis,

The only thing like that is the ANS sight-track rear sight mount which you already mentioned.

http://ahg.anschuetz-sport.com/english. ... icleID=520

-Brian

Jordan F. · Post by **Jordan F.** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:58 am

Dennis,

I was in a similar situation with my feinerkbau as I could not attatch anything to the front of it. I instead bought a 30mm sight extension tube made by gehmann. It attatches the back of it and from there you can attath you iris to it. If you can move your sight more forward and do this then it should help.

dlindenbaum · Post by **dlindenbaum** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:03 pm

Now there's an interesting solution That I hadn't thougt about. Easy enough to try. Also looked at an older Anschutz sight today. All metal fittings from the 60's and unused.

Dennis

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:16 pm

Here is something you can try. First observe in the pictures and then build you’re own. I made one up and o WHAT A DIFFERENCE.

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:17 pm

Here is something you can try. First observe in the pictures and then build you’re own. I made one up and o WHAT A DIFFERENCE

PHOTO THROUGH THE SIGHT WITH OUT DISK.

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:18 pm

Here is something you can try. First observe in the pictures and then build you’re own. I made one up and o WHAT A DIFFERENCE

WITH DISK

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:20 pm

Here is something you can try. First observe in the pictures and then build you’re own. I made one up and o WHAT A DIFFERENCE

MADE IT FROM PLASTIC.

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:22 pm

WANT TO READ MORE.

http://www.smallbore.us/forum/viewthrea ... rowstart=0[/size][/size]

dlinden · Post by **dlinden** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 5:00 pm

I like Brandon's concept. Along those lines, I've been talking to someone about manufacturing a 33 mm belled flange that can screw into an 18 mm Anschutz front globe sight. This will yield the same appearance as the Redfield International front sight.

For the rear, I've opted to go with a 1960's era Anschutz sight with a narrow, 45 mm long shade. This is a 1/6th minute sight and I found one essentially unused.

This setup is either a great idea or a total washout for reasons I've yet to discover. Brandon - What is the diameter of the disk you are using?

Dennis L.

Pat McCoy · Post by **Pat McCoy** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 5:27 pm

You might want to read a thread from just over a year ago on "proper use of aperture sights", in which it was reported that the centering of the front sight in the rear sight was of little import.

The centering of the bull in the front aperture is the primary concern.

dlinden · Post by **dlinden** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 5:42 pm

Pat - From what I recall about various discussions on that topic, other important factors are omitted. For example, don't you find that inconsistent head position affects recoil and point of impact? Telescopic sights sure help with this position consistency and may be in part why accuracy is easier to achieve. Or,open up the rear iris all the way or try just removing the rear sight altogether and see where the bullets fly.

Dennis L.

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Tue Jul 08, 2008 9:39 pm

Mine is 46mm I just happened on that size when I was playing with the idea. I would suggest that you get a VIBRAKE from MEC. Its basically a bridge mount so that you can move youre sight forward and backwards like I can. You will see as soon as the light changes around you. You will need to move the back sight forward in low light and more backwards as the light gets sharper. The idea is to keep you’re “light ring” a consistent size. Mine is forward because of very low light in the house, I dry fire a lot. Play with the forward ring sizes between 40mm – 50mm and find the one that gives you the most optimum “light ring” size for you.

Pat McCoy · Post by **Pat McCoy** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:18 am

Dennis,

I agree that cheek placement (and even pressure) can have an effect. I was speaking only to the idea of amount of light on the outside of the front sight itself.

Having one more thing to look at, and cause you to change focus, should be detrimental to the highest level of shooting.

It has been reported at one of the past coach conferences (sorry I can't get to me notes as they are packed for a move), that better shooters had longer times of looking undisturbed at the sight picture than lower level shooters (who were looking away from , then back to the sight picture). I have a problem with this myself, due to a floater wanting to settle in my vision after only a second and a half or so, causing me to have to blink and then fire quickly before everything greys out again.

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:57 pm

I agree. My coach drilled me on the rite cheek placement. I was one of those that just could not get the feel rite every time. After I added the disc I can confidently say I get it rite 1 out of 15 times. When I feel its out, I see it immediately through the back sight sometimes ever so slightly. I would just move my head away and start again and WALLA! I’ve got it. I set it that there is only a silver lining of light around it and I can tell you it is very sensitive to mistakes made by the head position.

tsokasn · Post by **tsokasn** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:32 am

Man,what a clever idea!!!

Pat McCoy · Post by **Pat McCoy** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:52 am

For consistant check placement, try putting a piece of moleskin on you stock. You should be able to feel it on your face the same way every time you mount the rifle.

brandonbc · Post by **brandonbc** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:45 pm

I’ve got some athletes plaster on my cheek piece for optimum grip and feel it still doesn’t help with the refinement which was mainly my problem.

2650 Plus · Post by **2650 Plus** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:00 am

Just a comment about the proposition That was described in the test that proved that sight allignment was not important. It was conducted with a .5 mm rear apperature. And may have limited application to larger apps. Be careful about shooter tests as we dont always know the competence of the testers and just take their word for the results. The man that conducted the test was a master class shooter and seemed to be well backgrounded in the sighting problems. Good Shooting Bill Horton

Pat McCoy · Post by **Pat McCoy** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:56 pm

Bill,

The study regarding sight alignment was indeed done with .5mm aperture, however any aperture smaller than the iris opening will work.

Normal iris opening is 2mm to 5mm. I use a very large rear opening at 1.9, and doubt if anyone would ever run into a situation where thier rear aperture setting was larger than their iris opening.