"Correct" sight for fowler

[fyrfyter43]

Or at least as close as possible.

My name should be coming up soon on TVM's list for the fowling piece I have on order. I plan on using it for some wingshooting, but it will also see a lot of use with ball for deer. I wasn't planning on having a rear sight, but it looks like I might be required to have a rear sight if I want to hunt deer using a single projectile. The law in NJ is a little vague as adjustable sights are required for shotgun slugs, but there is no mention of sights for muzzleloaders. I plan on asking a friend who works for Fish & Game about it, but I am thinking about having a rear sight added just so there is no gray area for a CO to harass me about.

My question is, what sights would at least keep with the spirit of a fowling piece? I'm sure a very low rear would be best so as not to be as much of a distraction for wingshooting. While the gun may not be 100% HC, I at least want to keep it as close as possible.

 

[Twice boom]

A rear folding sight will probably serve you best.

Now as far as wing shooting and sights. I personally do not pay attention to sights ,I focus on the bird in relation to where the muzzle of my gun and where the bird is and the direction it is flying. Although the gun is not aimed like you would a rifle, none the less subconsciously I am a ware where the muzzle of my gun is although my main focus is on the bird. The gun has to fit you well and you have to train yourself to bring it up and in the correct position and moving in sync with your moving body, if you can do that you will not have time to focus on sights .

But that's just me others may do it differently.

Twice.

 

[Dave K]

I have the traditional filed slot in the tang to use as a rear sight. It also lines up with the tang screw, which has it's slot parallel to the bore. The down side is you will have to bend the barrel, to adjust it. The plus side, once done, it is done forever. If you have Tom Grinslade's book, it will show you all the treatment used for rear sights on these guns and they are original guns.

 

[Celt5494]

Instead of putting on a rear right why not research the law and if it's not required print off a copy of it. If anyone says anything about it produce the copy and politely point out muzzleoaders are exempt. If the law says you have to have a rear sight well then you have your answer. Contact TVM and ask them what they can do for you on the sight.

 

[poordevil]

I think you answered your own question. A sight is required for a Shotgun with slugs, but a Muzzleloader does not require a sight. Will you be shooting a Shotgun with slugs, or a Muzzleloader?

p

 

[fyrfyter43]

I think you answered your own question. A sight is required for a Shotgun with slugs, but a Muzzleloader does not require a sight. Will you be shooting a Shotgun with slugs, or a Muzzleloader?

p

This was the way I originally looked at it, but then someone posted the other day about using buckshot in a Bess, with the explanation that adjustable sights are required in NJ if shooting a single projectile. That post made me question my reasoning.

I volunteer as a hunter ed instructor, so I could easily ask about it. The problem with that is that I would probably be told that it was an oversight in the compendium, and it would be sure to be in there for the next printing.

I'm starting to think it might be best to let sleeping dogs lie. And if it ever becomes an issue, I could always file a notch in the tang and bend the barrel so it shoots to POA.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Whether the law requires a rear sight or not is Not particularly relevant, IMHO. If you are going to hunt deer, it seems to me that your PERSONAL hunting ETHICS would demand that you use the most accurate sighting system you can find to insure a quick, humane kill.

The original fowlers, and many smoothrifles, came with rear sights. Front and rear sights were smaller or lower than we tend to use today. The rear sight notch is often just a hair above the surface of the barrel flat, with the wings wide and low.

I prefer a wide notch, so it does not interfere with using the gun to shoot flying or running game with shot loads. I know some people who remove their rear sights for most hunting, and only put them back in the dovetails when they are hunting deer, or coyote. Witness marks, and, sometimes, screws are used to lock the rear sights into the dovetail slot.

I agree with TWICE that how well you can shoot RB from a gun with a rear sight also depends on how well the stock is fitted to you. Stock fit- particularly drop at comb and cast--- is even more important in shooting shot loads at flying targets. :thumbsup:

 

[Twice boom]

And one more thing for as trivial matter as installing a rear sight is ,a peep sight can be installed rear of the tang that could be folded out of the way when hunting birds.. Simpler mater to accomplish with much better results than bending barrels IMO.

Twice.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Oh, yeah! :grin: NO doubt about that. :thumbsup:

 

[fyrfyter43]

2x...you've certainly shown us recently that you don't care about anything to do with HC/PC. However, I did state in my original post that it was a concern of mine. Quite honestly, I'm not interested in bastardizing the historical aspect of hunting with a smoothbore by putting either a folding rear sight or a tang sight on my fowling piece.

Obviously a TVM fowler is not a copy of any particular gun. However, it is in line with the spirit of a traditional fowling piece. It was a matter of what I could afford at this time, particularly with a new baby at home. I simply want to comply with the law, but also keep as true to the historical aspect of the hunt as possible.

 

[remuse]

And one more thing for as trivial matter as installing a rear sight is ,a peep sight can be installed rear of the tang that could be folded out of the way when hunting birds.
Twice.

Do you have a particular peep in mind? I have a Pedersoli trade gun with no rear and very low front sight that shoots several inches low at 20 yds. I like peeps but want something not glaringly out of place. For shot I'm used to using a lace on Cabelas pad to raise the comb height 1/2 inch or so if necessary.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Since peep sights go way back to cross bows, I can't see how they would not be Historically Correct on any fowler. :shocked2:

We may not see many old guns with them on the tang, but that doesn't mean they were not used, particular for the limited purpose of hunting big game, like deer.; Particularly for older shooters whose eyes are not in the best form, the peep sight is a solution to the problem that can keep them in the field hunting, and enjoying their MLers.

This demand for Orthodoxy has to have its limits. It works for young guys with young eyes and body parts. But, it doesn't always work for those of who have survived our "Youth". :thumbsup: :grin:

 

[fyrfyter43]

So, Paul, what you're saying is that I should maybe be considering, say, a 9x scope on this fowling piece? What whiz-bang sighting system do you use?

I would not be considering hunting without a rear sight if I wasn't sure I could reliably make a clean kill. Before dedicated slug barrels were as commonplace as they are today, I killed many deer with slugs out of the same full choke barrel I would be using later in the day with buckshot. Did I occasionally miss? Of course. Did I ever hit a deer that I didn't recover within a short distance? No.

 

[Twice boom]

And one more thing for as trivial matter as installing a rear sight is ,a peep sight can be installed rear of the tang that could be folded out of the way when hunting birds.
Twice.

Do you have a particular peep in mind? I have a Pedersoli trade gun with no rear and very low front sight that shoots several inches low at 20 yds. I like peeps but want something not glaringly out of place. For shot I'm used to using a lace on Cabelas pad to raise the comb height 1/2 inch or so if necessary.

Not really. Google search will point you to a source,though.
Twice.

 

[paulvallandigham]

No. Scopes don't appear until we get into the percussion era of rifles- basically in the late 1840s. You won't find them on shotguns, nor on flintlocks.

At 38 years of age, you have all your options open. If you have a well fitted stock, and can throw a front sighted fowler to your shoulder, and quickly shot a RB into a 4 inch circle at 50 yards, you are fit to use it to hunt deer, IMHO. You won't win many of the primitive matches at Friendship without a rear sight of some kind. Twice Boom has attempted to discuss the range of sights used. Because of my long experience shooting shotguns, I don't need much of a rear sight on my fowler to center my RB loads on target. I tend to look through and over the rear sight, using it more to help correct any cant to the barrel, and to help me center my eye down the barrel. I find in practice that I have small "windage" errors using the rear sight on my gun for these purposes.

I work on elevation issues by limiting my shots on deer to under 50 yards. I am sure you were doing much the same with that shotgun shooting slugs with only a front sight. :thumbsup:

 

[Twice boom]

2x...you've certainly shown us recently that you don't care about anything to do with HC/PC. However, I did state in my original post that it was a concern of mine. Quite honestly, I'm not interested in bastardizing the historical aspect of hunting with a smoothbore by putting either a folding rear sight or a tang sight on my fowling piece.

Obviously a TVM fowler is not a copy of any particular gun. However, it is in line with the spirit of a traditional fowling piece. It was a matter of what I could afford at this time, particularly with a new baby at home. I simply want to comply with the law, but also keep as true to the historical aspect of the hunt as possible.

Bastardize your hunting experience ,really. Doesn't your state laws says you have to wear orange ? .

I do care about HC/PC . My gun is an original and it don't get any more PC than that. My clothing for that period are correct ,but then again I am so PC correct in fact that I wouldn't do something if I had to make my cake and it too.
So what I gave you is indeed a compromise but then again what has been offered so far are also compromises even though few of the suggestions might be less visible to the casual eye.
Tell me what is wrong with the folding rear sight I suggested. And do not ever think I care nothing about pc/hc.I just wont allow myself to get rediculas about for something a trivial as a rear sight.
Twice.

 

[fyrfyter43]

But you said that ethics should demand that I use the most accurate sighting system I can find to ensure a quick, humane kill. Certainly a scope would be more accurate than open iron sights of any kind.

 

[fyrfyter43]

If I were interested in something like a folding rear sight, there would have been no need for this thread. I specifically asked about options to comply with the law that would still be PC. Hell, I could have just used epoxy to attach a rear sight for our deer season and removed it with a little bit of heat for wingshooting.

Yes, I am required to wear orange. However, the color of my clothing has very little impact on the historical aspect of my hunt compared to something as "trivial" as a rear sight. To me, my gun and the accoutrements necessary to shoot it are at the heart of my hunt. I am much less concerned with the color of my clothes.

If I am in fact required to have a rear sight on my fowling piece to be allowed to hunt deer with a single projectile, then I want that rear sight to be as historically correct as possible.

 

[Twice boom]

But you said that ethics should demand that I use the most accurate sighting system I can find to ensure a quick, humane kill. Certainly a scope would be more accurate than open iron sights of any kind.

I think you are twisting what Pual said. You did say you wanted to use the gun for wing shooting,no? How then does the scope fit in to the discussion.

Twice.

 

[Twice boom]

If I were interested in something like a folding rear sight, there would have been no need for this thread. I specifically asked about options to comply with the law that would still be PC. Hell, I could have just used epoxy to attach a rear sight for our deer season and removed it with a little bit of heat for wingshooting.

Yes, I am required to wear orange. However, the color of my clothing has very little impact on the historical aspect of my hunt compared to something as "trivial" as a rear sight. To me, my gun and the accoutrements necessary to shoot it are at the heart of my hunt. I am much less concerned with the color of my clothes.

If I am in fact required to have a rear sight on my fowling piece to be allowed to hunt deer with a single projectile, then I want that rear sight to be as historically correct as possible.

And why are you assuming a folding rear sight would not be HC on a smooth bore ..Heave you checked few original fowlers to see what they had as rear sights.

One other thing, Just to keep you out of trouble. I would not assume the conservation officer has been reading this board to know that the file marks on the rear of the barrel or your guns tangs represent HC rear sights there fore he'll be obligated to give you a free pass.

Twice.