Searched here/no luck- most accurate springer w/ useable iron sights under scope

[pdxFrank]

Definitely want a. 22.

Just need to figure out how to put a scope on to use both. 

Very interested in your suggestion



Scope suggestions for this setup? Probably something with versatile/wide range of eye relief.

lost me there, as i tend to just get a cheap scope and go for it. never made sense for me to spend more on it than the gun.

i just move them around until i find a good fit. i tend to prefer rifles with open sights as an option.

 

[Fischer]

Definitely want a. 22.

Just need to figure out how to put a scope on to use both. 

Very interested in your suggestion



Scope suggestions for this setup? Probably something with versatile/wide range of eye relief.

lost me there, as i tend to just get a cheap scope and go for it. never made sense for me to spend more on it than the gun.

i just move them around until i find a good fit. i tend to prefer rifles with open sights as an option.

I have gotten good results from all sorts of scopes and I understand the meaning of the rifle being and staying more expensive than the scope and mounts.

In .22 I'd go for either HW95 Plain Jane or HW95L or HW80K .22 (Long range hunter) but if a scope is going to be used I'd dedicate the rifle to the scope.

You can't have both worlds in having a scope and iron sights dueling each other; you end up compromising either type of sight. The iron sights are already mounted as low to the bore as possible; the scope has to be raised above that lower sight plane and the extra height of the scope makes your trajectories for the Irons and the Scope differentiate to compensate for above normal height sight in (with scope). The HW95L is great for sights and scopes. The sights on the ambi stock are too low for my cheek to see them, the scope on the HW95L in either .22 or .25 (I have both) works very well to take that HW95L out to 50 yards with a scope.

Look into an HW95L (it has iron sights front and back you can "switch" into what your eyes see best; but after you put a scope on the HW95L you will see things you thought were impossible to do at longer ranges.

Don't worry about drop in a .22 HW95L! I have that and the .25 itself which I've shot over 100 yards with accuracy I could NOT believe (the .25 believe it or not is more accurate at 100 yards than the .22).

I think you want a .25 HW95L. I LOVE mine and its brother, my HW80 .25.

Why not just go .25 and avoid all the wind drift problems with lighter faster pellets? I'd choose my HW95L .25 OVER my HW95L .22 for accurate shooting with a scope.

It just turns out that way for me and you avoided the .177 and .20 which are lighter.

 

[KWK]

I have gotten good results from all sorts of scopes and I understand the meaning of the rifle being and staying more expensive than the scope and mounts.

In .22 I'd go for either HW95 Plain Jane or HW95L or HW80K .22 (Long range hunter) but if a scope is going to be used I'd dedicate the rifle to the scope.

You can't have both worlds in having a scope and iron sights dueling each other; you end up compromising either type of sight. The iron sights are already mounted as low to the bore as possible; the scope has to be raised above that lower sight plane and the extra height of the scope makes your trajectories for the Irons and the Scope differentiate to compensate for above normal height sight in (with scope). The HW95L is great for sights and scopes. The sights on the ambi stock are too low for my cheek to see them, the scope on the HW95L in either .22 or .25 (I have both) works very well to take that HW95L out to 50 yards with a scope.

Look into an HW95L (it has iron sights front and back you can "switch" into what your eyes see best; but after you put a scope on the HW95L you will see things you thought were impossible to do at longer ranges.

Don't worry about drop in a .22 HW95L! I have that and the .25 itself which I've shot over 100 yards with accuracy I could NOT believe (the .25 believe it or not is more accurate at 100 yards than the .22).

I think you want a .25 HW95L. I LOVE mine and its brother, my HW80 .25.

Why not just go .25 and avoid all the wind drift problems with lighter faster pellets? I'd choose my HW95L .25 OVER my HW95L .22 for accurate shooting with a scope.

It just turns out that way for me and you avoided the .177 and .20 which are lighter.

You say the ambi stock is great for sights and then you said the sights are too low for you to see them on the HW95L and that's the ambi stock. I have a Santa Rosa R9 and the sights are too low for me to see as well. Same thing with my HW95L of the same vintage. The comb is too high to use the sights. They're useless. And I don't care because both guns are scoped with a muzzle brake.

Your point about dueling sights and scope is exactly what I've been trying to convey. You end up with a compromise that basically is supposed to protect you from a scope failure issue in the field that has never happened for me. The HW95/ R9 is not known to be a real wrecker of airgun rated scopes.

Interesting you suggest the .25. I've never had one but do have a .25 Webley Tomahawk on it's way right now. Might arrive tomorrow. I understand it launches .25 HN FTT's 700 fps. Something different for me to try. Anticipating.

 

[ElementalBreakdown]

Hey, no stubbornness here! 

I'm just going by what I have had on rifled shotguns and rifles in the .30 cal family, higher scope mounts never caused an issue.

My FAL has an Acog mounted about 1/4" high so I can use the iron sights and at 100 yards which is the furthest I can see I can shoot equally well with either.

Maybe that doesn't translate into airguns because of the lower velocities, but the sight picture alone or the imagined discomfort of shouldering it higher are non-existent to me on any other rifle. 

 

[survivor45]

I think at this point you need to just buy the air rifle of your choice. And the optic you intend to use. Mount the optic in the “traditional sense” And shoot. Get to know the gun and how it performs for you in your shooting environment. Once your happy with how that setup preforms. Then you can move on to figuring out your see through scope mount set up. 
Good luck and keep us updated on your success and failures. 

 

[Fischer]

I have gotten good results from all sorts of scopes and I understand the meaning of the rifle being and staying more expensive than the scope and mounts.

In .22 I'd go for either HW95 Plain Jane or HW95L or HW80K .22 (Long range hunter) but if a scope is going to be used I'd dedicate the rifle to the scope.

You can't have both worlds in having a scope and iron sights dueling each other; you end up compromising either type of sight. The iron sights are already mounted as low to the bore as possible; the scope has to be raised above that lower sight plane and the extra height of the scope makes your trajectories for the Irons and the Scope differentiate to compensate for above normal height sight in (with scope). The HW95L is great for sights and scopes. The sights on the ambi stock are too low for my cheek to see them, the scope on the HW95L in either .22 or .25 (I have both) works very well to take that HW95L out to 50 yards with a scope.

Look into an HW95L (it has iron sights front and back you can "switch" into what your eyes see best; but after you put a scope on the HW95L you will see things you thought were impossible to do at longer ranges.

Don't worry about drop in a .22 HW95L! I have that and the .25 itself which I've shot over 100 yards with accuracy I could NOT believe (the .25 believe it or not is more accurate at 100 yards than the .22).

I think you want a .25 HW95L. I LOVE mine and its brother, my HW80 .25.

Why not just go .25 and avoid all the wind drift problems with lighter faster pellets? I'd choose my HW95L .25 OVER my HW95L .22 for accurate shooting with a scope.

It just turns out that way for me and you avoided the .177 and .20 which are lighter.

You say the ambi stock is great for sights and then you said the sights are too low for you to see them on the HW95L and that's the ambi stock. I have a Santa Rosa R9 and the sights are too low for me to see as well. Same thing with my HW95L of the same vintage. The comb is too high to use the sights. They're useless. And I don't care because both guns are scoped with a muzzle brake.

Your point about dueling sights and scope is exactly what I've been trying to convey. You end up with a compromise that basically is supposed to protect you from a scope failure issue in the field that has never happened for me. The HW95/ R9 is not known to be a real wrecker of airgun rated scopes.

Interesting you suggest the .25. I've never had one but do have a .25 Webley Tomahawk on it's way right now. Might arrive tomorrow. I understand it launches .25 HN FTT's 700 fps. Something different for me to try. Anticipating.

I'll be interested in your assessment of the Tomahawk .25 Webley made in Turkey I think now. I have never owned and shot a .25 springer that didn't amaze me in performance, range, and accuracy. The thing of it is that .25 pellet can go fast enough in an old Webley .25 Eclipse I owned some decades ago. That Webley underlever Eclipse .25 made me see things the tiny pellets .177 go too fast for and miss! That Eclipse Underlever Webley I got USED was the time I realized the .25 is MORE predictable in harsh conditions than any lower caliber pellet sans .20 caliber.

The .25 in a decent air rifle is the crush for me. Every single .25 I owned to date AMAZED me with their own ability to hit FAR like Field Artillery precisely to your target.

It is a pellet we MUST invest in and continue to experiment with!



I love the .25 and the .20 though not necessarily in that order!

Kindly,

 

[ElementalBreakdown]

I assume you weren't talking to me because I don't think I mentioned an ambi stock or .25



All I know is from other shooting sports and setups and I use them on my FAL and other rifles. The only long arm I have glass only on is my Remington 870 and in the past it has been a headache.



I was thinking about giving the el cheapo flip up sight below.



Off topic: If it doesn't work I can just put it on my blowgun. What a HOOT the .625 caliber blowgun is!!!! There's a video online of a guy that took a black bear with one (using very sharp broadhead darts) - My first reaction when I saw the link to the video is "Oh great, something else for the anti-hunter crowd to latch on to", but he says upfront that ethical hunting is important to him and that spears and blowguns are the most ethical weapons he has used. I would have never believed it if I hadn't seen how fast the bear went down. Quick and clean kills are important to every good hunter I know. With the blowgun, it barely registers it has been hit after initial impact and goes down within sight. I have shot deer with a .50 sabot rifled shotgun slug and completely took out the heart and it still went 100 yards, plus the hydrostatic shock of a firearm is much different than a sharp arrow etc. that kills from drop in blood pressure. Sorry for the off-topic part of this post, I thought maybe someone else would find it interesting.

I can't wait to get my new springer! 



I appreciate the last comment about just getting what I want and sorting everything out afterwards, I need to be reminded not to overthink things sometimes : 0



Ultralight Flip Up Sight 45 Degree Offset Rapid Transition Front and Backup Rear Sight

 

[Fischer]

I assume you weren't talking to me because I don't think I mentioned an ambi stock or .25



All I know is from other shooting sports and setups and I use them on my FAL and other rifles. The only long arm I have glass only on is my Remington 870 and in the past it has been a headache.

The wingmaster is my favorite shotgun and I used one in college for recreational shooting. I did not like the autoloader or couldn't afford it and stuck with the Wingmaster for trap shooting.

I had tried over unders and side by sides but the one shotgun that always performed for me is the 870 Wingmaster.

Today the arm is available in heavy metal steel instead of Wingmaster light and tight choked bores.

I use only one shotgun and the rifles are all over the place. The 20 guage 870 Wingmaster still remains. No 12 or 16 or 28 or .410 just the 20 gauge in the 3" barrel attached to my 870.

If I wanted to use a slug I'd have to endeavor there for accuracy using the ribbed double beaded with an ivory front sight.

Or order a "slug" barrel. But in N0. 3 Buckshot the .20 will clear a path as dangerous as double ought 12 gauge in a larger diametered bore.

You can't bring this subject up on an Air Gun Nation forum because now we talk slugs and buckshot and the lack of a shotgun with a slug to do what you expect unless you change chokes and slugs to figure out the "accuracy" problem giving you a headache.

Your shotgun will work fine if you use it like one with shot instead of some slug that can't get more accurate than 4" at 100 yards.

Use the Buckshot for your gauge here; like double ought for 12; NO. 3 Buckshot for 20.

I patterned 20 and 12 gauge buckshot to find the number 3 pellets labeled as 20 gauge buckshot do MORE damage than 9 pellets out of a 12 gauge.

But we are on the subject of airguns aren't we?

 

[ElementalBreakdown]

Again, slightly apologetic for this sidetrack, but it's an interesting discussion. For the last 20 years I have used sabot slugs and have never considered going back to buckshot. The rifled shotgun barrel with a sabot is accurate to absurd distances. 

The relevancy here though is thatI had not even considered the twist rate in airguns. Anyone know of a particular air rifle that's benefitted from rifling? Are most of them rifled? Definitely something to consider and Google isn't showing very much information I find useful.