Author Topic: why scope a hand gun (Read 4604 times)

hoggunner · « **on:** January 09, 2009, 01:24:15 PM »

O.K> this is just my thoughts on this issue and I am sure some will disagree. I for one can not see putting a scope on a revolver. If you are talking handguns that shoot rifle or necked cardriges that is different.
First its too hard to hold a handgun steady enough for a scope. I am talking putting meat on the table here not punching paper from a bench. second its to hard to see game thru a scope this is of course is even harder to do in low light. I for one use a holo sight on my revolver for hunting and think it is the best sight one can use for hunting. I am sure with enough practice one can get good with a scope, but do you need one for shots under 100 yrds.
Lets hear your thoughts on this issue

Casull · « **Reply #1 on:** January 09, 2009, 02:23:20 PM »

My 47 year old eyes don't work as well as they did at 25 (when I shot a bit of competitive handgun silhouette). I had a recent eye exam and the doc said no need for regular glasses (20-20 in the right eye and 20-25 in the left), but did prescribe reading glasses for the up close stuff (seems my arm's getting shorter). Therefore, my .454 SRH sports a Leupold 2x for deer hunting. Maybe because of the low magnification, I don't have any trouble shooting off hand with it. Funny thing is that off the bench, I do almost as well with my .44 M29 with red ramp front and white outline rear sights. But as far as black sights, they just aren't that good with my eyes anymore beyond about 50 yards.

MS Hitman · « **Reply #2 on:** January 09, 2009, 02:55:17 PM »

I think you are entitled to your opinion and I don't agree with it.

Ken ONeill · « **Reply #3 on:** January 09, 2009, 02:59:09 PM »

I still use a number of revolvers with iron sights, and I like them a lot for some purposes. I also began scoping handguns in 1979, and today use them on many revolvers and single shots. It does take familiarity and practice, but there is no question that a person who applies themselves to the task can learn to shoot more accurately with optics, whether scopes or red dots.
Why scope a handgun / revolver? For the same reason one scopes a rifle: To aid with more accurate bullet placement, and when necessary, to help thread a bullet through trees, brush or even other herd animals. Although I've hunted with many rifles over the years, today and for some time, I do and have hunted only with handguns. Given a choice, I'll select a revolver when possible ( for the best reason in the world: I like 'em) unless the game being pursued is likely to be found between 125-300 yards.
I can't abide wounding game. Scopes are one element, along with practice, and an adequate gun / caliber, that help prevent such unsportsmanlike situations.
I find target acquisition to be faster with a good scope than with iron sights. However, I have many years of experience in doing both ( I'm an old feller ). Someone who is new to using scopes does indeed need to shoot and practice with them a lot...but practice is necessary in any event.

Lone Star · « **Reply #4 on:** January 09, 2009, 03:18:22 PM »

I would think that a hog hunter especially would see the advantages of a scoped revolver. A scope (or better yet a red dot) gives much better site/target contrast in poor light on a dark wet hog than the typical iron sight setup. You can see better, maybe have a better chance of hitting the right spot and not hitting a dog.

It is a common misconception that it is harder to hold a revolver steady with a scope. Not true. When aiming, the revolver moves around just as much with the scope as it does with iron sights - you can just see it happen better in the scope. Because you can see the target better, you can hit better. But like anything, it takes practice - and a scope without too much magnification. A Leupold 2X EER is just right, it has less that double the magnification of no scope, is bright, lightweight, and robust. But I wouldn't argue with anyone who wanted to mount a 2x7...

.

Sverre A. · « **Reply #5 on:** January 09, 2009, 05:00:11 PM »

I have just ordered the airplaneticket to South Africa - and will in April bring with me a 629 4" with quickdetachable mounts for a Doctersight and a Leupold 2x.
I feel that the Docter is the right thing for me in bushy areas out to 50 yds - and a scope beyond that.

With open sights - I feel that I don`t have good enough control - when the frontsight is what I have to focus on.
And how many times are the animals standing broadside - without some branches in front of it

?
I also feel that I spend more time using open sighs than optic.

With a Doctersight - I also carry the gun as "easy" as I do with open sights.

The load will be a Mimek 300 gr. hard cast at 1000 fps.

Swampman · « **Reply #6 on:** January 09, 2009, 05:30:43 PM »

I killed a Turkey at 60+ yards with my scoped Redhawk. No meat damage, because I broke his neck. If you want to improve your shooting by about 500% it's worth a try.

Mohawk · « **Reply #7 on:** January 09, 2009, 07:56:55 PM »

I don't scope my handguns but that is just personal preference. I probably would but I just don't care for scopes, even for my long guns. And, ironically, I was raised with a scoped rifle to hunt with but I feel I grew a dislike for them. But, if I were to need a long range shot, I would use a scope and make it work, but would still be uncomfortable with it. That's why, like this year, I used my .357 Magnum on both deer, but I hunted from bow stands and the shots were around 20yds. I wouldn't take open sights very far out when killing game, even with a rifle. Now that being said, I really like red-dot sights with no magnification, especially the hologram design on AR's.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 10, 2009, 01:58:10 AM »

I have handguns with scopes, with red-dots and just plain iron sights. I don't have a problem shooting any of them. The thing is how much you practice with a scoped handgun. I choose my handgun for the situation I am in, if I have a long shot opportunity I take one of my scoped handgun, if I am in a heavy wooded area with low light conditions, my red-dot handguns will get the nod. I also take my iron sighted handguns in heavy wooded area, where shot are usually under 50 yards.

As MS Hitman posted, your are entitled to your opinion and I don't agree with it either.

GradyL41 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 10, 2009, 04:21:00 AM »

while I still have a couple of open sighted guns --for deer hunting --I want a scope -- a scope is far more a help than any hinderance---took 2 this past season

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #10 on:** January 10, 2009, 04:57:22 AM »

I don't hunt with scopes YET, however my eye sight continues to deteriorate I will be useing them soon I think, Right now I like my irons and can still bust clays on the berm at 100 yards with them, I do feel that scopes are in my future thou.

Scibaer · « **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2009, 06:52:02 AM »

scopes on handguns for hunting and target practice are great, all my handguns for those activities wear them.
you just need the right scope on the right handgun and you will never go back to iron sights
just my 2 cents

Dave in WV · « **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2009, 08:00:06 AM »

Even when my eyes were good I was more accurate with my dot sight. Now I can either take my glasses off, look over my glasses to see the sights, or use my dot sight with my glasses on. If someone doesn't want to use an optical sight more power to them. I'm almost ready to put a laser sigth on two of my defense handguns because of my eye sight.

Varmint Hunter · « **Reply #13 on:** January 10, 2009, 11:30:59 AM »

Putting a scope on a revolver is like putting a gun turret on a VW Beetle. It may work but it sure changes the nature of the tool. Transforms it into something that it was never intended to be. at least IMO.

While I have always had scopes on my Contenders/Encores & XP100, I never had one on any revolver. That is until recently. I decided to just give it a try on my SRH. The nice thing about using a scope on the SRH is that it's easy on & easy off. After a brief trial period I decided that a revolver belongs in a holster and the holster shouldn't have to look like a piece of luggage. You know, so big that it will cover a large handgun, mounts and scope. That seems to take away the whole utility of handgun and side holster. Something to be said for tradition I guess.

For what it's worth, I don't consider a scoped Encore, XP100 or Striker to be a handgun. Someone coined the term hand-rifle and that seems to better describe this type of firearm.

Just my 2 cents and I have no problem with anyone who sees things differently.

Cement Man · « **Reply #14 on:** January 10, 2009, 04:02:50 PM »

When I hunt with a handgun is equipped with a scope or a dot. My 62 year old eyes require it. When I carry a "sidearm" it is not scoped, but its use is different.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #15 on:** January 10, 2009, 06:15:12 PM »

I'm having my 629 6" D&T'd this week for my scope mount and red dot, should I choose to use it. But I normally carry and use my iron sights.

irold · « **Reply #16 on:** January 11, 2009, 03:03:07 AM »

Have to agree with several other posters , I have scoped , doted , and iron sighted handguns....depends on where I'm hunting and the distances expected on which one I take......I love to shoot the iron sights , but the scope is gets the nod at extended ranges........I'm talking 75 yards and beyond ,,,,OMO , irold

bluecow · « **Reply #17 on:** January 11, 2009, 03:42:52 AM »

how about peep sights?

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #18 on:** January 11, 2009, 03:59:28 AM »

i agree with mohawk. Its been years since i shot anything with a scoped rifle let alone a handgun. Using open sights and getting up close put the excitement back in my hunting. I do have scoped rifles but there mostly for punching paper at long distances. Plus they just look ugly on a handgun.

Quote from: Mohawk on January 09, 2009, 07:56:55 PM

I don't scope my handguns but that is just personal preference. I probably would but I just don't care for scopes, even for my long guns. And, ironically, I was raised with a scoped rifle to hunt with but I feel I grew a dislike for them. But, if I were to need a long range shot, I would use a scope and make it work, but would still be uncomfortable with it. That's why, like this year, I used my .357 Magnum on both deer, but I hunted from bow stands and the shots were around 20yds. I wouldn't take open sights very far out when killing game, even with a rifle. Now that being said, I really like red-dot sights with no magnification, especially the hologram design on AR's.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #19 on:** January 11, 2009, 04:00:36 AM »

they dont allow for as percise of a shot on a handgun. they may be a tad faster for some people though. They are probably my favorite lever gun sight though.

Quote from: bluecow on January 11, 2009, 03:42:52 AM

how about peep sights?

Handgun Hunter · « **Reply #20 on:** January 11, 2009, 06:13:22 AM »

I hunt Whitetail with a handgun and only 2 years with sights, the next 18 years I've used a scope for shot placement. I quickly learned that my skil level is not such that I would ever take a shot at a deer running with a handgun. And there is only one deer I've shot while walking. I just treat the handgun like I do when bow hunting ( the range is extended a lot ). I do extensive scouting pre season and have a prety good idea where the deer will show from. Then I will set up an ambush piont, wait till a good shot presents it's self, use my shooting sticks, and grunt him to a stop for the few seconds I need to pull of the shot. Works most of the time for me. So if I'm going to " snipe " the deer, why not use a scope for shot placement?

This is just what works for me and I'm sure there are people good sight or bad, that don't need one, but the way I hunt with a hangun, it gives me that bit of confidence exactly where that bullet is strikeing.

Bushmaster1964 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 11, 2009, 09:51:17 AM »

I use a Matchdot Ultradot on my 500 smith, seems like it helps me to get on target (pigs) quicker, but thats just me, no magnifacation on it though, I did once try a simmons 3x6 variable on my 480, but like you said, it slowed me down and to be truthful, I don't need to be shooting at a distance to really need mag. I am not that good with a pistol, maybe 80 yrds or so I can hit a 6 inch plate from standing consistantly, the 100 yrd most of the time, with the matchdot or open sites but not enough to chance wounding an animal.

Bigeasy · « **Reply #22 on:** January 11, 2009, 11:16:22 AM »

When I am just bumming around in the woods, I carry a 4 inch model 29, 4 3/4 .44 spec /.45 SA, .22 Bearcat, stuff like that, all with open sights. When I am hunting seriously, I prefear a longer barrel, and an optic sight of some type. The Right optic just makes hitting easier, which means increased opportunity, and hopefully cleaner kills.

bulletstuffer · « **Reply #23 on:** January 11, 2009, 12:29:30 PM »

Nothing beats a scope for precise shot placement. A deer looks pretty small through a 2x Leupold at 100 yards let alone open sights. The variables are nice but seem bulky for the revolvers but are awesome on the encores or contenders. Also, you don't need a bench to shoot with a scope. Same principals as shooting with open sights but with better accuracy. Good luck.

Bulletstuffer

blhof · « **Reply #24 on:** January 11, 2009, 01:10:43 PM »

I qualified expert more than once and with multiple weapons in the USAF, however I shoot pistols best with a scope, even more so since I turned 58 and focusing on the sights is difficult except in bright daylight. How many game animals are up during mid-day. Got a scoped Ruger single six, on an auction because nobody else bid on it. I've taken quite a few squirrels nd rabbits with that pistol. I still have iron sights on most of my Dan Wesson barrels, but use the scoped for hunting.

Old Griz · « **Reply #25 on:** January 11, 2009, 05:44:59 PM »

I'm sure that as hoggunner gets older, he will see the value of a scoped hunting handgun.

ELMO · « **Reply #26 on:** January 12, 2009, 02:00:00 AM »

I have reddots and regular glass scopes on my handguns. It all started about 12 years ago when my eyes just can't focus on the open sights anymore. It was same time I needed reading glassess to read the newspaper. The doctor said it is just part of the aging process and is normal. I used to be able to shoot great with open sights, not anymore. This for me started happening when I turn 40, I just turned 54 and my eyes have been the same for years now, I just need reading glasses to focus. Most of my rifles now have scopes on them and I accept the fact that if I want to hunt or shoot for accuracy my eyes need the help....

Bushmaster1964 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 12, 2009, 01:14:37 PM »

Quote from: ELMO on January 12, 2009, 02:00:00 AM

I have reddots and regular glass scopes on my handguns. It all started about 12 years ago when my eyes just can't focus on the open sights anymore. It was same time I needed reading glassess to read the newspaper. The doctor said it is just part of the aging process and is normal. I used to be able to shoot great with open sights, not anymore. This for me started happening when I turn 40, I just turned 54 and my eyes have been the same for years now, I just need reading glasses to focus. Most of my rifles now have scopes on them and I accept the fact that if I want to hunt or shoot for accuracy my eyes need the help....

Boy, thats the truth, I'm 45 now and reading a newspaper without my reading glasses is torture. Seems like up till a couple of years ago I could see great, then it's like someone flipped a switch and either I was going to have to get longer arms or glasses.

odoh · « **Reply #28 on:** January 12, 2009, 05:05:43 PM »

Ask the question in a few yrs. By the time one is in their 60's, the options pretty much limited to optical sights. Then theres the matter of preferences. . . . . . .

45 yrs ago, all I had was a P-17 Enfield full military to hunt with. A huge deer appeared and I raised the rifle and looking over the irons, I noticed the blade was fatter than the deer was long

Hmm, lemme see, just where along the plateau/butte of that fat blade was the bullet impacting when I had sighted it in? Hmm, yeh ~ lost confidence in it and had optics on everything since as being more exact/precise and instills confidence in the equipment. Additionally, in that most of my working life has been in technical skills, I tend to be more annal about things including bullet placement. I'm comfortable that way and thats who/what/way I am and pay for my own equipment.

With the use of optics, holster to carry them tend to be bulkier and I would like the carriability of iron sights but again, w/age, options diminish to optics or very close/short range shooting.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #29 on:** January 15, 2009, 03:27:43 AM »

I'm 52 and regular iron sights are just fuzzy unless I got my 200 power reading glasses on. Then the target is really fuzzy, so back this year I figured out how to make a rear apature sight like the One Ragged Hole for my S&W 629 and it works great for my eyes out to 60 yards where I can group inside a 6" pie plate in the kill zone.

I may keep it this way if I like it, but remove it until my next purchase is made. After I play around with this tomorrow, I can remove it and put my old iron sight back on for HD use or leave as is and well ......