ML Sights--Why Buckhorn & Bead?

[Cosmoline]

I prefer iron sights on rifles and use them almost exclusively. But I've noticed that the traditional ML rifles including mine come with a buckhorn or semi-buckhorn rear and bead front. In my experience this is a sighting system for delicate target work and has no place on a working rifle. I agree fully with Elmer Keith that the stout sourdough front is far better than a delicate bead sight, esp. since I've managed to destroy the bead on every such firearm I've owned. Just did it last night with the kodiak while trying to remove teh #$@$ thing. One stray tap with the brass rod and the bead flew away. If that had been a tree limb on a hunt, I would have been SOL.

As far as the buckhorn, the "horns" on either side make acquisition painfully slow and un-instinctive. I much prefer a peep or receiver aperture sight so I can instantly and naturally center the front post. And I know I'm not alone in this. I'm in the process of equipping my Kodiak with PROPER express sights.

So that makes me wonder, why are so many traditional smoke poles equipped with such delicate, impractical sights? Surely they can't all be designed for target matches. In many respects the old style of a simple shotgun sight on the end of the barrel with a well-fitted musket is better in the field than the existing system.

 

[Swampman]

I prefer the bead front sight as that is what I learned to shoot with when I was 6 years old. I like a semi-buckhorn rear sight because traditional muzzleloaders need traditional sights IMO.

 

[Cosmoline]

According to this, the Lyman aperture dates to 1878, with earlier apertures going back to Roman times:
http://www.lymanproducts.com/lymanproducts/images/No 2 Tang Instructions.pdf

Also, the actual antique smoke poles mostly seem to have simple shotgun beads out front with no rear sight at all.

Does anyone know when the buckhorn sight was invented?

 

[tg]

Many production level guns have been equiped with more modern types of sight be it peep or open, it is probably the resitance of many (or percieved resitance by the manufactures) of going back to the type of sights that were used on originals in the pre 1840 time frame which is where most production MLs land more or less

 

[omarick1948]

Aperture rear sight is pretty useless in the pre-dawn morning of the deep deer woods. Point! I took my Sharps (I know Claude, not a muzzleloader!) with an aperture rear sight deer hunting a couple years back and at shooting time, I looked down the sights and couldn't see much of anything, not to mention an old tree stump I was trying to sight on about 50 yards down the deer trail!....Might be OK for full daylight, but I don't think that have a use at the more common pre-1840 M/L events.

 

[renovato]

I know what you mean about buckhorn sights being uninstinctive. When I first got my Austin & Hallecks, I had a heckuva time getting used to them. They make a good sight for target shooting alright, but I haven't had enough experience with them in the field to know they'll work out.

As for the bead, I have always liked beads. They are quick to pick up. I haven't broken one yet and I'm pretty clutzy. I'll probably change my mind the first time one breaks! :haha:

Sometimes authentic technology is pretty primitive compared to what we're used to. Just part of the price we pay for doing things the old way. I think the benefits far outweight the disadvantages though.

 

[Cosmoline]

Just to clarify, by "bead" I don't mean a shotgun bead (a brass bead stuck at the end of the barrel). Those are fine for their purpose. I mean the brass bead sights where there's an extremely thin blade supporting the bead, like this Williams:
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=374799&t=11082005

One smack on the side and that thing will bend or break. In contrast, the actual antique ml rifle sights I've seen have been far more simple, with just a stout blade and basic notch in the rear. Sometimes they don't even have a rear sight. I'm very doubtful the ornate blade & bead/buckhorn combination ever saw much use in the 18th & 19th century hunting field. It's a target sight through and through.

 

[paulvallandigham]

The real problem with the rear, " buckhorn" sight for most shooters is that the notch is too small. For daytime shooting, on a sunny range day, shooting at black bullseye against a white, or off-white background, its fine. But for hunting, the notch needs to let daylight on the sides of the "bead "front sight.

If you use a half round, or " rat-tail " file to open up that notch, they work wonderfully. I began shooting a bead-on-a-post front sight and a small notch, in a .22 Winchester rifle. It was later that I first shot a straight post. The worst sight shape for me to get used to was the inverted " V " on an old military rifle. I could not center that sight in a standard " V " notch rear sight. I mention it only to let you know there are worse sights than the Bead front sight to use. Because I trained on the bead sight, I have learned to use them. I find them okay for bullseye target work, but prefer the straight post for hunting. I have one rifle that sports an " 8-inch" bead front sight, that ended up having the sides filed down to make the sight narrower, and cover much less of the target. I left the shiny " bead " on the sight only because it does pick up better in the rear sight notch in poor light.

 

[rebel727]

I like a full buckhorn. I use it as a ghost ring. Your eye will automatically center the bead. Works for me.

 

[Vaino]

On my personal MLers, a steel front sight w/ a .100 wide blade is used which has an angled faced silver inlay soldered in. These front sights are made from 2 pieces, browned and are very sturdy. Never cared for a "buckhorn" sight because of the restricted view....much more complicated than a flat top w/ a square notch. The evolution of iron sights has made them simpler, more user friendly and the "fads" and poorly performing sights have just faded into disuse. If for PC reasons a "buckhorn" sight is used, that's the shooter's choice but it didn't generally survive to the present day because there's no advantage and some disadvantages in it's use.......Fred

 

[Ironwood]

I've been wondering about the buckhorn sights. Do you just look through the buckhorn without paying any real attention to it? Just the same as you would an aperture tang sight. I see someone said they use theirs like a ghost ring.

 

[paulvallandigham]

In poor light, the hardest thing about bring your rifle to bear on a target is to align the sights. The Buckhorn allows you to quickly put the rear sight in alignment with the front sight, and then bring the sight to the center and down into the notch for a " fine bead ", hold, assuming that is how you have zeroed the rifle. :hmm: :thumbsup:

In a candle shoot at night, one 4th of July, members of my club shooting T/Cs and other more modern sights, had a hard time finding their rear sights at all in the dark. I finally told them how to located the rear sight first by using the light of the candle shining off the top flat of the barrel to orient their eye and the rear sight on the rifle. Then using that same light reflection, they could find their front sights. Using my buckhorn signt proved to be much easier in finding the sight than using a more simple, square notch sights I favor, for instance, on my revolvers. Once the front sight is located between the buckhorns, it was a simple matter to center it, and then bring it down so that the flame was above the front sight, creating a shaddow of the front sight for easier alignment with the candle flame so I could shoot it out. :hatsoff: :shocked2:

You can read more information on candle shooting in my article on "Off-hand and Trick Shooting", found under member resources at the top of the Index page here.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

Beads and buckhorns are not traditional ML sights at all. Most original rifles had a low, flat top rear sight and a very low brass or silver "barley corn" front. The buckhorn had it's vogue in the latter half of the nineteenth century, most common on cartridge guns and it is a horrible sight for target shooting or anything else. I believe it was T/C which made the bead front common on mass produced MLs but T/Cs front bead is quite sturdy, its' only drawback is that it stands high above the barrel so that if the rifle falls it is certain to impact the sight.
The best form of open sight, whether for target or hunting, is a straight, flat topped post front, or the "sourdough" as you mention, combined with a wide, flat topped rear with a deep and wide notch. The wide rear notch allows a good bit of light on both sides of the front and the straight sides of the notch and front post made it easy to center the post in the notch, while also easily holding the flat top post perfectly level with the flat topped rear. For target work the post should present a vertical or even undercut rear surface and for hunting a dab of paint or nail polish can serve the purpose of the bright insert of a sourdough which seems to be no longer made.
The rear peep is by far the best of iron sights and works very well with a low bead front. It is the quickest of all iron sights to acquire a sight picture and is also more accurate than the open rear, especially for those of us who no longer see our sights very well. The hunting peep should have a large aperture for use in dim light, at least a .090" aperture and I prefer a full 1/8" peep hole. Those who insist peeps are no good for dim light have simply been using too small a rear aperture. The U.S. Army went to the peep sight before WW11 and never looked back. Does anyone believe wars are fought only on bright sunny days? With the M1 rifle and carbine we used to rub white chalk on our front sights for use at night. :grin:

 

[nw_hunter]

As an old M1 shooter, I agree with you. I hunt with T/C's now...No more M1 thumb :grin: . Of all the sights on my T/C's ,I like the front thick blade and the flat top wide notch rear sight on my Renegade barrel the best.The 62 drop in barrel from GM has the brass front and V type rear sight.I will open it up some!

The brass bead is easy for me to see in low light, but I just use the white chalk on the renegade blade for low light conditions.

The bead sight on my Hawken and narrow V notch rear, is terrible for my tired old eyes, and I will replace them with a peep some time down the road.

 

[deanscamaro]

I was looking through this "sights" post and had a question. I am a newbie and I know this is probably hard to answer, but generally, what type of sights are "legal" in most paper target events in the ML field?

 

[paulvallandigham]

Range rules can differ from club to club, but most clubs use the NMLRA rules as their standard. Open sights must be that- OPEN! No globe front sights, no shaders(hoods over the front or rear sights), no peep sights. Some rules require the rear sight be located a certain minimum distance from the eye to prevent " cheating".

I don't know any rules that restrict you to the shape of the notch in your rear sight, or width of the notch. I don't know any rules that restrict you as to the width or height of the front sight, or that disallow " bead " front sights. Some traditional pistol matches will disallow rear sights, or modern ramp front sights, or have an OPEN match for those shooters who have guns so equipped. Matches tend to be created to allow people with the same type of equipment to compete against others with the same equipment.

Anyone who has been around target shooting competitions knows there is always someone who is trying to bend or break the rules in ways the match directors have not anticipated, to give themselves the edge. Even in ML matches, this kind of attitude is seen. I have never understood why. I have never been to, or witnessed a shoot where the " first place prize" amounted to enough to inspire all the work to " cheat " to win it.

But, in my years of representing crooks, I have found that a certain number of people like to " cheat " because they enjoy the thrill of getting away with something, even if it has no value. I call them " thrill Junkies", because they are just as surely hooked on this as anyone who uses illegal drugs.

 

I have found buckhorn sights to be annoying as I have a tendancy to catch them on everything: clothes, branches and the like. So I never use them. When I first started ML shooting, I thought they looked cool - and I still do. But in terms of usefulness - they are not on my list of favorites.

 

[Golfswithwolves]

The good thing about the buckhorn sights is that you can easily cut off the horns and then file down the remaining sight parts until it is a low and flat sight; then file whatever sight notch you require. Voila, the buckhorn is then OK and costs nothing more for a new sight! Those beads-on-a-stick front sights can't so easily be modified, and I replace any I have with a low and wide front blade. I find it better to have low sights so that I don't need to raise up off the riflestock in order to see the sight picture, and I think this type of sight is also what was used on most old rifles. Why the marketing departments of today's rifle manufacturers decided that high buckhorn and bead sights should be used is a mystery to me.

 

[WV MZL HUNTER]

Good read, I am looking at a peep sight for my Renegade. My eyes are got what they used to be.

 

[redwing]

Whoa, hold on there. Thats a very incorrect statement :redface: no Buck Horns in the day of M/Ls. If you dig around and collect old original side locks you'll find Buck Horns.

I have owned a few original J.Henry & Sons trade Rifles with the original Buck Horn rear sights. I do believe they were later sights. They may have come after 1840 not sure. But they existed on Winchesters and Marlin Lever guns for over 100 years.

They are not my favorite sight. That being said, as was mentioned here they are to be used as a modern large peep or Ghost ring. They are open on top to gather light unlike a standard peep. In old books Etc. they are called the Rocky Mtn.Sight. They were also used on Sharps Etc.

As Paul stated you also need to carefully cut a nice notch in the bottom of the Buck Horn for your more accurate shots. My problem with them is the shadow effect across the sight when the sun sets low to your left or right. A full Buck Horn can throw a big shadow blocking the light from your sight notch. :hmm: