I cant believe the way the lock side is screwed on without no inletting. to add to it the wrong screws were used or the plate not counter drilled which makes the screws not flush with the plateI am blessed with excellent long range vision, it's the close stuff that gives me problems. I knew it was coming so over the years I gave a lot of thought to what I'd do when I could no longer see well enough to shoot. I am a hunter now but I used to shoot a lot in BP matches, and I regulary do a lot of shooting on my home range, so I knew the end result I wanted to achieve.
So just a few years ago I checked the sights on my .54 and .40 flintlocks and I could see to shoot fine. But that same season around christmas I shot the .40 in prep of a squirrel hunt. To my dismay I could no longer shoot accurately, there were 3 distinct lines where the top of the sight should have been.
But I was prepared due to thinking about it. I made up a few peep sights I had been thinking about. These were to be small and unobtrusive, almost like they were meant to be on a longrifle. They have a small amount of verticle adustment, windage adjustment is by the front sight. The key for windage is how accurate I can drill and tap the center of the tang. There is a good bit of hand work involved but I'm a retired Tool & Die maker/Aerospace structural data SME , so it was no big problem.
I have it on both my .40 and .54 and the next rifle I build will have one also.
My vision cleared just as I needed. I know my peeps could be fancied up but I like them as they are.
No I am not selling them.
Help for old eyes
- Thread starter Jake2454
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
And if the VA didn't supply me with good "reading glasses", I'd be on the line to Decot also. May try them later in the year.
- Joined
- May 24, 2021
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 122
turning down the screw heads and countersinking the plate seems like it wouldnt be hard for a man of your skill dets
So I guess you are another self named gunmaker trying to "put me in my place". Well I admit I'm not a gunmaker.
You have some good eyes to see the lock side in any of those photos. " I cant believe the way the lock side is screwed on without no inletting.
Those are not screws. Those are lock bolts. Used to hold the lock in it's mortice.
What are the correct "Screws" I should use?
'' or the plate not counter drilled which makes the screws not flush with the plate"
If the side plate had of been counterbored deep enough to be flush they would be out the other side and not holding anything to the rifle.
My advice to you is to stay out of the fight. Your grammar is atrocious. You don't know the correct names of the components and you don't know anything about the meaning of even simple machining terms.
Here is another view of that rifle for you to critique.
I dont care if you paid 20K for that rifle and they used lag bolts to hold the lock. the way that plate is mounted on the stock is a horrible display of so called workmanship. every rifle I ever saw the plate was inletted no matter how cheap the rifle wasSo I guess you are another self named gunmaker trying to "put me in my place". Well I admit I'm not a gunmaker.
You have some good eyes to see the lock side in any of those photos. " I cant believe the way the lock side is screwed on without no inletting.
Those are not screws. Those are lock bolts. Used to hold the lock in it's mortice.
What are the correct "Screws" I should use?
'' or the plate not counter drilled which makes the screws not flush with the plate"
If the side plate had of been counterbored deep enough to be flush they would be out the other side and not holding anything to the rifle. I could get a kid changing oil in wal mart auto center to do a better job
My advice to you is to stay out of the fight. Your grammar is atrocious. You don't know the correct names of the components and you don't know anything about the meaning of even simple machining terms.
Here is another view of that rifle for you to critique.
Last edited:
I am a rough framer and ANY idiot even you could inlet that plate. I would not buy the rifle after seeing that mr wise guy
That rifle was built 15 or so years ago. It was my second build. Thank you for pointing out what you deem as rookie mistakes. The side plate IS inletted, it is inletted to the depth of the angle machined into the sideplate. It is not intended to be inletted flush with the wood but some rifles do require a flush fitting side plate, this is not one of them. But to know that one would need to know even a little about different type rifles and how they are constructed. That leaves you out. To be honest I have never been satisfied with that sideplate and mortice nor how it looks but it is what it is and it's good enough for me as one of my personal rifles. You make me wonder if you even remotely understand the purpose of my post.I am blessed with excellent long range vision, it's the close stuff that gives me problems. I knew it was coming so over the years I gave a lot of thought to what I'd do when I could no longer see well enough to shoot. I am a hunter now but I used to shoot a lot in BP matches, and I regulary do a lot of shooting on my home range, so I knew the end result I wanted to achieve.
So just a few years ago I checked the sights on my .54 and .40 flintlocks and I could see to shoot fine. But that same season around christmas I shot the .40 in prep of a squirrel hunt. To my dismay I could no longer shoot accurately, there were 3 distinct lines where the top of the sight should have been.
But I was prepared due to thinking about it. I made up a few peep sights I had been thinking about. These were to be small and unobtrusive, almost like they were meant to be on a longrifle. They have a small amount of verticle adustment, windage adjustment is by the front sight. The key for windage is how accurate I can drill and tap the center of the tang. There is a good bit of hand work involved but I'm a retired Tool & Die maker/Aerospace structural data SME , so it was no big problem.
I have it on both my .40 and .54 and the next rifle I build will have one also.
My vision cleared just as I needed. I know my peeps could be fancied up but I like them as they are.
No I am not selling them.
That rifle is not for sale. Never has been. Was never intended to be. I took liberty on some things to suit me and my needs, which it does to my complete satisfaction.
I don't build anymore. But the ones I have built and sold were received happily by the customers. The customer got a rifle with a tuned lock and trigger/triggers at the requested pull weight. My locks are slick and fast with dependable quick ignition. I would not sell a rifle in any other condition.
I know some people sell rifles with gritty feeling locks and expect the customer to find someone to tune the lock for them. I feel that is an unfinished rifle and the customer is being ripped off.
Neither will I sell a rifle that has the mortices filled with wooden slivers to correct the builders obvious lack of skills. I will scrap the stock and start with a new one at my expense if the error was my fault. I never needed to do that.
Enough for now. I have better things to do than banter with an idiot.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 24, 2021
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 122
Darkhorse i meant no disrespect......all i was saying was that with the skill level you showed on the gun as a whole that if you wanted to make those changes it certainly seems that you would be able to accomplish them with very little trouble.
if i offended you i apologize
if i offended you i apologize
I took no offense Jake. That drivel the other guy is spouting is totally off the mark. He is wrong on most all accounts but it's tough to ignore such as he. And yes, I could have done what he said if it was the right thing to do.
Don't worry about it Jake, all's well.
Don't worry about it Jake, all's well.
- Joined
- May 24, 2021
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 122
thanks it is appreciated....my dad once told me not to sweat the little stuff and my marial arts instructor told me....civility always civility....sometimes both are hard but i try to remember their words
Jake, I taught Tae Kwon Do in my own school for many years. But I also worked for the Dept. of Defense and on 9/11 many things changed. There is only a handful of people who did what we did and all of us went on 12 hour days 7 days a week.
I had no choice at the time but to close the school. Subsequently I suffered a severe injury to my left leg and that ended my TKD days. I do miss it.
Once a black belt always a black belt. But that doesn't mean we must endure verbal and physical attacks on ourselves. It does however mean we should practice restraint and self control. It has been many years now since I've walked a mat and I must admit I've slipped some.
I had no choice at the time but to close the school. Subsequently I suffered a severe injury to my left leg and that ended my TKD days. I do miss it.
Once a black belt always a black belt. But that doesn't mean we must endure verbal and physical attacks on ourselves. It does however mean we should practice restraint and self control. It has been many years now since I've walked a mat and I must admit I've slipped some.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 3,754
- Reaction score
- 5,529
That is what I use, but need really good light.
- Joined
- May 24, 2021
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 122
well its good to know there is another MA brother in the forum. like you health issues ended my MA days but i am glad i did it and was taught by one of the most respected men in the field who by the way appears in the book "Karate Masters". my oldest daughter married a guy from the Dojo who finished 10th in the world in Italy in Karate about 7 years ago and is now a Major in the US Army military police. I worked for a small company that did R&D for the Dept of Defense so small world yes? thank you for the work you did there and on 9/11. and beyond. For me the order of the day is being happy and enjoying my time left on this rock. I understand you being offended but in the big picture the barbs and insults we are subjected to just really dont amount enough to interrupt my enjoyment of life. all that matters is that you and your past customers are happy with your work and that is something to be proud of. i wish you well on your "Endless Journey" (the title of a book written by my MA instructor)
smoothshooter
50 Cal.
I said that wrong. I should have said don’t be afraid to have them move the close, or intermediate distance portion closer to the top.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 13,235
- Reaction score
- 7,582
TC made this type of mounts for their proprietary scopes, to fit the rear sights hole patterns on both their round and octagonal barrel rifles. Have any of you fellas ever used the set up? How did it work out for you?
Mods can remove or relocate if inappropriate but gotta say it:
If you have sight trouble don't be a jerk and wait like i did!
I was a big chicken about anything to do with my eyes. Blind 12 feet out. Couldn't even do contacts. Stopped open sight shooting altogether when both front sights and rear sights basically "disappeared". In addition, things were really getting dark (even in full sunlight) had to go to doc. He takes one look and says you have Fuchs Disease and asks about my agent orange exposure in SEA. I say Fuchs???!!! he says "yes!" and got immediately scheduled for surgery. New donor corneas, plastic lens, and cataracts gone. One eye at time (of course) barely an hour each outpatient, one night on your back and a weeks recovery. You wake up in same exam chair they knocked you out in. Chair is wheeled into operating room and wheeled back without you knowing. Boom!! darn near 20-20 , 1000 yard vision. (unmentionables out to 600+ with open sights). Colors and brightness like never before. Can see the 100 yard target rings and even large bore hits without those fancy targets. No more scopes, Medicare cost --zero. Even paid for lodging. Why did i wait so long?????
[
- Joined
- May 24, 2021
- Messages
- 174
- Reaction score
- 122
wow.....impressive
My current view out front window is across a wide river (like 3/4 mile) can clearly see all the boats, folks fishing and all in brilliant detail and colors. On the range I can see both open sights clearly and hold a 6 o'clock without effort. Also get to wear either cheap non prescription safety and sunglasses for first time! Downside is a must remember to wear them when needed for eye protection.
Attachments
I'm new to muzzleloading - actually, I don't even do muzzle loading. I'm a Service Rifle shooter, retired mechanical engineer who studied optics at MIT, photographer, and I'm old enough my near vision went, so I studied the optics of the human eye and developed the solution for shooters. I have been doing corrective lenses for shooters for 10 years, and was recently told at Camp Perry that I need to talk to the muzzle loading community, especially since I live in Cincinnati, right next to Friendship. So ...
Definition 1: Depth of Field (DoF). Your eye only has one theoretical focal point at any particular moment, however if the width of the blur line of an 'out of focus' object is smaller than the distance between two photoreceptors on your retina, you cannot see it. Hence the theoretical focal 'point' is actually a range including some distances closer than the focal point, and some distances further than the focal point. How big your DoF is, is determined by the size of the aperture you are looking through.
Definition 2: Aperture. The smallest opening in your optical path. Within reason, does not matter where it is. It might be your pupil, it might be an aperture sight on the rifle, or it could be a sticker with a small hole drilled in it that you have stuck onto your eyeglasses, or a merit disk. When people find that they can focus better with more light, it is not actually because of the increased light, it is because the increased light makes the pupil in your eye constrict, reducing aperture size, improving your eye's natural depth of field.
Definition 3: Diopter. A measure of lens strength, based on how much it shifts your focal point. The relaxed (or corrected) human eye focuses at infinity. If you add a positive diopter lens, it will shift your focal point closer without your eye making an effort. The adjusted focal point will be the inverse of the diopter strength, in meters. eg, if you add +2.00 diopters (typical reading glasses strength), your relaxed eye will be focused at 1/2 meter, about 20", good arm length for reading. Some people prefer +2.50 diopters, 1/2.5 = 40 cm = 16". +3.0 diopters is 1/3 meter which, if you remember the old 12" rulers that were 30cm on the other side. Reciprocals work too: +0.50 diopters = 1/2 diopter = 2 meter = 8 feet. These are awesome for watching television. The human eye can detect changes in focus about as small as 1/8 diopter = 0.125. So basically, from +0.125 = 8 meters, out to 0 diopters = 1/0 = infinity meters, it all looks the same. So basically, all targets are at optical infinity.
A sight picture needs two things: for your eye to have a good depth of field, and your point of focus must be at a distance so the depth of field is centered between your sights and the target (referred to as the hyperfocal distance in photography). Ideally, your depth of field is big enough that the sights are in the near edge of your depth of field, at the same time as your target is in the far edge of your depth of field. This part of my theory is a departure from the old adage 'focus on the front sight'. It might be OK to concentrate on the front sight, but if you truly focus ON the front sight, your target is too blurry. By focusing at the hyperfocal, you have slight blur on the target, and slight blur on the sight, but the clarity looks balanced.
As stated, the relaxed (or corrected) human eye focuses at infinity. You exert the ciliary muscle in your eye to squeeze the lens, which brings your focal point closer. You relax the muscle, and the lens' elasticity restores focus to infinity. At around age 40, the lens loses it's elasticity, and the muscle has to struggle harder to focus up close. For really close, you cannot do it, for medium close, you can do it for a few seconds, and the muscle tires and fades. Another way to bring your focus in closer is to add a positive diopter lens in front of your eye, aka reading glasses or a bifocal if you have distance correction. Lens power relates to focal distance, however standard reading glasses are typically MUCH too strong to shoot with.
Seeing the front sight is a 'middle distance' where shooters struggle. With a rear aperture, the correct answer on a rifle is to add +0.50 diopters of lens, because you are balancing focus between front sight and target, leaving the aperture fuzzy. This is way weaker than reading glasses. With pistol, where the sights are closer, you want to add +0.75 to +1.00 (depending on how blurry you like the target). I have never experimented with buckhorn sights, but imagine it will be at least +1.00 if you want to balance focus between the rear sight and the target. If someone can tell me the distance from your eye to the buckhorn, I can run the math and give a quick estimate.
Bottom line, to see your sights like you did when you were 18, you need to use a +0.50 lens, and an aperture sight. If you shoot buckhorns, you likely need a +1.00 lens, and put a sticker with a small hole on your glasses (like eye pal, or make it yourself).
Art Neergaard
Definition 1: Depth of Field (DoF). Your eye only has one theoretical focal point at any particular moment, however if the width of the blur line of an 'out of focus' object is smaller than the distance between two photoreceptors on your retina, you cannot see it. Hence the theoretical focal 'point' is actually a range including some distances closer than the focal point, and some distances further than the focal point. How big your DoF is, is determined by the size of the aperture you are looking through.
Definition 2: Aperture. The smallest opening in your optical path. Within reason, does not matter where it is. It might be your pupil, it might be an aperture sight on the rifle, or it could be a sticker with a small hole drilled in it that you have stuck onto your eyeglasses, or a merit disk. When people find that they can focus better with more light, it is not actually because of the increased light, it is because the increased light makes the pupil in your eye constrict, reducing aperture size, improving your eye's natural depth of field.
Definition 3: Diopter. A measure of lens strength, based on how much it shifts your focal point. The relaxed (or corrected) human eye focuses at infinity. If you add a positive diopter lens, it will shift your focal point closer without your eye making an effort. The adjusted focal point will be the inverse of the diopter strength, in meters. eg, if you add +2.00 diopters (typical reading glasses strength), your relaxed eye will be focused at 1/2 meter, about 20", good arm length for reading. Some people prefer +2.50 diopters, 1/2.5 = 40 cm = 16". +3.0 diopters is 1/3 meter which, if you remember the old 12" rulers that were 30cm on the other side. Reciprocals work too: +0.50 diopters = 1/2 diopter = 2 meter = 8 feet. These are awesome for watching television. The human eye can detect changes in focus about as small as 1/8 diopter = 0.125. So basically, from +0.125 = 8 meters, out to 0 diopters = 1/0 = infinity meters, it all looks the same. So basically, all targets are at optical infinity.
A sight picture needs two things: for your eye to have a good depth of field, and your point of focus must be at a distance so the depth of field is centered between your sights and the target (referred to as the hyperfocal distance in photography). Ideally, your depth of field is big enough that the sights are in the near edge of your depth of field, at the same time as your target is in the far edge of your depth of field. This part of my theory is a departure from the old adage 'focus on the front sight'. It might be OK to concentrate on the front sight, but if you truly focus ON the front sight, your target is too blurry. By focusing at the hyperfocal, you have slight blur on the target, and slight blur on the sight, but the clarity looks balanced.
As stated, the relaxed (or corrected) human eye focuses at infinity. You exert the ciliary muscle in your eye to squeeze the lens, which brings your focal point closer. You relax the muscle, and the lens' elasticity restores focus to infinity. At around age 40, the lens loses it's elasticity, and the muscle has to struggle harder to focus up close. For really close, you cannot do it, for medium close, you can do it for a few seconds, and the muscle tires and fades. Another way to bring your focus in closer is to add a positive diopter lens in front of your eye, aka reading glasses or a bifocal if you have distance correction. Lens power relates to focal distance, however standard reading glasses are typically MUCH too strong to shoot with.
Seeing the front sight is a 'middle distance' where shooters struggle. With a rear aperture, the correct answer on a rifle is to add +0.50 diopters of lens, because you are balancing focus between front sight and target, leaving the aperture fuzzy. This is way weaker than reading glasses. With pistol, where the sights are closer, you want to add +0.75 to +1.00 (depending on how blurry you like the target). I have never experimented with buckhorn sights, but imagine it will be at least +1.00 if you want to balance focus between the rear sight and the target. If someone can tell me the distance from your eye to the buckhorn, I can run the math and give a quick estimate.
Bottom line, to see your sights like you did when you were 18, you need to use a +0.50 lens, and an aperture sight. If you shoot buckhorns, you likely need a +1.00 lens, and put a sticker with a small hole on your glasses (like eye pal, or make it yourself).
Art Neergaard
Similar threads
