Anyone use scope-less hunting rifles? Pros and Cons?

[Mauser257]

I have. It all depends on how fast your average shots are. For up close, I like irons because it’s easy to lose the animal in the scope. But there are a lot of variables.

[Mountaintop_memories]

Hunting whitetail in the South, a lot of people don’t use scopes because you literally can’t see more than 30 yards sometimes in the woods. I’m personally far more comfortable with a scope. I don’t take shots on running deer so I don’t have to worry as much about fast acquisition.

[Known_Acanthaceae_87]

Pros: manliness
Cons: aim

[SportingClay]

I don’t have a scope or optics on my bolt action 44 mag rifle. If the deer is within 50 yards, I don’t need optics and it’s easier to get through the brush.

[DjangoSucka]

I’ve got an Winchester 94 that I’d be fairly comfortable using out to ~75 yards.

The only con I could think of is many manufacturers simply aren’t making affordable rifles (especially bolt guns) with iron sights anymore, so it may be hard to find one on a shelf somewhere.

Beyond that, the pros would be the ability to stay in the hunt if you notice your scope rings are loose or if you knock the scope really hard while walking around.

[jsar16]

Depends on confidence and distance. The more distance generally the less confidence with iron sights. I use both where I hunt but tend to grab the scoped rifle more.

[Returnofthejedinak]

I shoot a lot of rabbits in the western district of Victoria, never use a scope. The pros are you can get your shots out a lot quicker therefore more successful hunts. I used to bring along mates, always with scopes and they would always end up getting pissed off, because they couldn’t get a shot off when I’m taking down rabbit after rabbit in quick succession. They always want to wait for the perfect shot, but when the action is thick and fast there is no such thing. One property owner would drive us around on the back of his utility vehicle, and I would try and let my mate take the first shot but the property owner would be yelling “Shoot! Shoot! Fucking Shoot!”. City mates with scopes could never adapt to this kind of hunting and would miss easy shots. A couple of times mates let their frustration out verbally and I would be told not to bring them again.

I have property in the high country and stalk deer, never use a scope. With a good stalking technique I get in close and usually startle them in close range, but there are definitely times when they are a bit further out in thick forest and I can’t tell exactly what is going on, if they’re bucks or does even, and in this situation a scope would be far better than none.

[Started_WIth_NADA]

I use optics but my dad hunted with an 03-A3 for two decades and regularly took deer at 200m.

[ResponsibilityOk8876]

I like them for river bottoms or really bad weather, I’ve had so much snow blowing that it covers the lense rather quickly. At this point most scopes are better in low light than iron sights, but if I am jumping a deer I don’t mind irons

[Meta_Gabbro]

Pros: better field of view, no eye box to worry about (faster to get on target, easier to shoot from odd positions), easier to zero/dope (realistically you’re only going to be using unmagnified sights within point blank range so you don’t need to worry about zero distance or figuring out precise drops), fewer moving parts to break, water/dust/scratch proof, cheaper

Cons: limited range ( both optically because it will be difficult to see adequately, but also because a 1mm front post 36” away from your face will be larger than a 9” vitals area at ~300yd, so it’s difficult to tell whether or not you’re even aiming properly beyond that), limited use in low light (a large objective lens will make an image appear brighter than the naked eye), three planes to worry about aligning than just two, usually not adjustable on the fly.

I tend not to use irons on rifles, though some of mine have them. AR optics work about as well for short-distance stuff. Red dots and 1x prisms split the difference between scopes and irons and get some of the advantages and disadvantages of both but I think overall they come out ahead.

[hbrnation]

Major pro for me is how easily they carry and handle with no scope. You can carry it by the receiver super comfortably, which makes it great for still-hunting in thick timber. Easy to carry, easy to shoulder and point.

[604Ataraxia]

SKS for deer. Mounting an optic is not an option. I’d be confident at 100m or less.

[Sea_Charity_3927]

Scopeless rifles are ideal for african dangerous game animals like lions since most shots on a lion are less than 30 yards. The pros are pretty much just better peripheral vision on something like a lion. The con’s are there’s obviously no zoom so longer shots become difficult or even next to impossible.

[get-r-done-idaho]

I hunt with old lever guns a lot. Iron sights are great just need to practice with them. Also do a lot of long range shooting using sliderule type iron sights.