458 socom scope vs iron sights

[cl4p-tp]

So after 1 1/2 years of buying parts as they became available I finally have all the part I need for my new AR in 458 socom besides a scope or sights. I just can't decide. This gun is going to be primarily a range gun(I like thumpers) but it will be coming out into the woods a few times a year for deer season. Most of the shots I get where I hunt are 50-75 yards, and my typical range for plinking will be around 100 yds for this gun.

So which would you guys/gals choose, scope or irons? Also which make/model. Thanks

 

[42769vette]

So after 1 1/2 years of buying parts as they became available I finally have all the part I need for my new AR in 458 socom besides a scope or sights. I just can't decide. This gun is going to be primarily a range gun(I like thumpers) but it will be coming out into the woods a few times a year for deer season. Most of the shots I get where I hunt are 50-75 yards, and my typical range for plinking will be around 100 yds for this gun.

So which would you guys/gals choose, scope or irons? Also which make/model. Thanks

A lot is going to depend on your optics budget. If you dont have the budget to do it right, then dont do it at all. If you go with a scope I caution you to not fall into the "over zooming" trap. Far to many people think it requires 18x to shoot a deer at 100 yds.

If you can give us a idea of budget we can help a lot more bud.

 

[M67]

For that close, a simple red dot might be good. AIM is having their sale right now for Primary Arms red dots, $50 delivered and you can get a riser mount for them decently cheap ($8 UTG 1" or something like that)

Or a Vortex SPARC, Bushnell TRS-25, Vortex Strikefire, or a 1 power Spitfire.

1-4 scope might not be bad either but again could be overkill.

Like Alan said, don't get more scope than you need, which for the ranges you intend on shooting, could be easily done

 

[sloughfoot]

There are guys on the forum that make a living selling optics. I don't want to step on anybody's toes. But this is just my humble opinion.......

For pistol distances, 50 to 75 yards, all you need is a front sight on a AR type rifle. Don't even bother with a rear sight. Shoot it like a shotgun with a bead up front. A rear sight will just slow you down.

For plinking at 100 yards, a front sight is all that is needed also. For precision and tight groups, a rear sight can help.

My understanding of plinking is that it does not require precision or tight groups. I admit I have struggled to understand what plinking is and what it is intended to accomplish. It is outside my experience. But I try to understand the concept.

 

[42769vette]

There are guys on the forum that make a living selling optics. I don't want to step on anybody's toes. But this is just my humble opinion.......

For pistol distances, 50 to 75 yards, all you need is a front sight on a AR type rifle. Don't even bother with a rear sight. Shoot it like a shotgun with a bead up front. A rear sight will just slow you down.

For plinking at 100 yards, a front sight is all that is needed also. For precision and tight groups, a rear sight can help. My understanding of plinking is that it does not require precision or tight groups.

I agree with you to a extent, and your not stepping toes. Where I disagree with you is when someone talks about most shots being that close, with the max being 75 yds in hunting a lot of times that means threading the needle between trees, brush etc. When you have to thread the needle a touch of zoom is a good thing, and a lot of zoom is a horrible thing. You have to keep in mind not everyone spends the time on iron sights you do, so just because you could make the shot with only the front sight does not mean its ethical for me to try it when a deer is what is going to pay the price (slow death from mis placed shot) from my overconfidence. If you go scope, and not red dot I would not go above 1-4 max. With the 1x you can shoot both eyes open for when the deer is moving threw thick brush, and zoom in a little if need be for that 75yd thick brush shot. Im in no way saying you HAVE to have a scope, or red dot, but what I am saying is if you do decide on something besides irons do it right. If I were building your gun for your purpose I would have a PST 1-4 on it without question. They run 479-499 and I have no clue if you think thats to cheap for a scope, or crazy expensive for a scope.

 

[sloughfoot]

Thank you sir.

I have iron sighted rifles. I have rifles with red dots. I have rifles with high power scopes and low power scout type scopes. I am proficient with all. Because I shoot. A lot. And often.

I am 63 this year. I have my Grandfathers Winchester 30-30 with buckhorn rear and gold dot front. He took deer with this rifle in 1957 in the "little green swamp" in northern Minnesota. I have taken a few myself by laying that antique gold bead in the boilermaker of the big buck and letting the hammer fall. A clear shot is a clear shot, no matter what you are using to line it up.

The 12 gauge with a simple bead with slugs is a proven deer slayer also.

A low power scope or a red dot is also a viable option as well. Lots of magnification is a detriment in the Indiana or Northern Minnesota woods.

 

[Bennettjh]

A lot is going to depend on your optics budget. If you dont have the budget to do it right, then dont do it at all. If you go with a scope I caution you to not fall into the "over zooming" trap. Far to many people think it requires 18x to shoot a deer at 100 yds.

If you can give us a idea of budget we can help a lot more bud.

Too much scope is a PITA.

 

[42769vette]

I am proficient with all. Because I shoot. A lot. And often.

And there is the difference between what works for you, and what works for most shooters sir.

Its been my experience dealing with hundreds if not thousands of deer rifles that the vast majority take many years to hit the 100 Rd milestone. And the vast majority of shooters take a full year to send 1000 rds of ammo threw a rifle. I'm guessing you would not have hit your level of proficiency at 1000 rounds total a year.

 

[sloughfoot]

You are absolutely correct. the one box a year shooter has always been the bane of this sport/discipline. I do not absolve anybody of absolute responsibility to make a certain, no-suffering shot on game. I have been physically chastised for being non-responsible with a firearm. I was 10. I never forgot. I never repeated my juvenile mistake. I determined that I would be proficient with any firearm that I picked up for use.

But in my progression over the years, I have witnessed and experienced the uselessness of the rear sight for hunting wild animals and the arrest of desperate humans.

There is a way to make hits with an AR type rifle not using the sights, or any sights at all. But the front sight is ALWAYS useful. I would be glad to show you if you like.. It would take about 10 minutes.

I look forward to meeting you on a rifle range sometime. I think we would have a lot of fun.

Do you still have that Winchester Model 70 in .260 that I sold you like 5 years ago?

 

[42769vette]

You are absolutely correct. the one box a year shooter has always been the bane of this sport/discipline. I do not absolve anybody of absolute responsibility to make a certain, no-suffering shot on game. I have been physically chastised for being non-responsible with a firearm. I was 10. I never forgot. I never repeated my juvenile mistake. I determined that I would be proficient with any firearm that I picked up for use.

But in my progression over the years, I have witnessed and experienced the uselessness of the rear sight for hunting wild animals and the arrest of desperate humans.

There is a way to make hits with an AR type rifle not using the sights, or any sights at all. But the front sight is ALWAYS useful. I would be glad to show you if you like.. It would take about 10 minutes.

I look forward to meeting you on a rifle range sometime. I think we would have a lot of fun.

Do you still have that Winchester Model 70 in .260 that I sold you like 5 years ago?

Honestly I can see where the rear sight could be done away with. As long as you have a consistant check weld it wouldnt matter. Shooting with no sights would be a trick you will have to teach me some day. If you got your NPOA set, and focused on shooting in your pause I know the sights dont matter much, but how would you get your NPOA without sights?

Do you still do anything with Appleseed? Im always up for a road trip to do a seed, but we should definitely make it a point to get on the line somewhere this summer.

I ended up selling the model 70 about 3 years ago, but it served me well. I don't have my book in front of me, but we didn't know the round count when I got it, and I put roughly 6000 through it before selling it (fully disclosing that it needed a barrel), and building another 260 on a stiller action. I know there are better ballistic calibers on the market, but I love how I can practice with a 260 (99% of what I do anyhow) without burning a barrel as quickly. I do wish I had bought those sights with the rifle.

 

[Hookeye]

Use a front and rear sight, reddot or scope.

Lots of turkey hunters only use a single bead up front and in the excitement of the shot fail to keep the same sight picture they used when sighting in (usually shoot over the bird by seeing "too much rib" compared to when zeroing). Dual beads help with this but some folks still muck it up. Know of a few backwoods types that use similar for deer and have had problems afield.

Yeah, one can successfully use a single bead, or a bead and rib and even on a long bbl.................but such systems are slower to line up, and when done quickly may have substantial error.....the distance between reference points may be quite long and not help with focus/finer alignment.

I can't believe anybody would recommend such crap today. No serious deer hunter uses that stuff, and I have burned enough of my tags putting down deer wounded by idiots/slobs from neighboring farms.

Peep rear sight will help with older eyes, and works great. Normal equipment..........on an AR. Boggles me to have anybody say "no rear sight" on such a rifle.

Buy sights or optic or stay out of the woods. Can't see using a $$$$ rig and then doing it half arsed by not dropping just a wee bit more for legit sighting system (irons).

IMHO a variable scope with a 1X or 2X at the low end would be ideal.

When a nice buck pops up at 150 yards you might like a legit sighting system.

A scope puts aiming point and target in focus and magnification may allow you to see stuff you otherwise might not.............like a branch right where you intend to place a bullet.

 

[Hookeye]

I've shot decent slug groups with single bead vent rib shotguns to 50 yards............ know that such simple systems can work.
I also have killed a few deer.......... and prefer dual reference sighting systems or optics.

Constant cheek weld.................when it's cold I wear a facemask, pretty thick one too.

Yeah, some folks don't use a rear sight correctly when the critter shows up. Oh well.

 

[snapping turtle]

I like nice scopes about half the cost of the rig I am using seems to work for me. A model 60 marlin would get a take off from something I bought and pulled off the scope. Since I feel you have 700 In the upper and 500 in the lower you have about 500 to spend on glassing it out. Sure you can go cheaper or pull from something else you have already.

now we get into the multi use scopes with Warne or similar quick detachable rings. Since normally you shoot one at a time you can switch a good scope from one to another. Ar's thompson center contenders some lever guns and bolts work well at this. An added plus is Unscoped rifles fit in the safe better that scoped ones. I have a 24 power scope that I put on for testing group size of reloads but as stated I would not use it I. The field for deer. It has QD rings. My scout scope has QD rings if I want to run my peep sights in heavy fog rain or snow. My Vortex scopes all sport QD rings. With the Warne ones they are spot on after detaching and reattaching.

 

[cl4p-tp]

Thanks for the input everybody. As for price if I end up going with a scope/optic I would like to keep it around $400. If I go with irons I really don't know on price.

Also, I should probably tell you that all my rifles have iron except one .22 that is scoped, and that I tend to prefer irons

 

[42769vette]

Thanks for the input everybody. As for price if I end up going with a scope/optic I would like to keep it around $400. If I go with irons I really don't know on price.

Also, I should probably tell you that all my rifles have iron except one .22 that is scoped, and that I tend to prefer irons

You have enough budget to do the optics right, so now your back to which you prefer. Most folks shoot better with a scope, some dont.

 

[N_K_1984]

...1-4 scope might not be bad either...

If you really want glass for Indiana deer hunting, I think a quality 1-4x type of scope is the way to go.

 

[Hookeye]

I run a 2-7X currently (non AR platform, 200 yard max range cartridge).
But have used those that go down to 1 or 1.5X on slug guns.
They make movers up close pretty sweet.