Answer Looking For Question

[Flatfish]

Seen a tv show recently.

They were hunting cape buff in Africa with double rifle......which is nice and normal.

The fly in the ointment was, the double rifles were fitted with Aimpoint sights.

Maybe the glow in the dark optic for dangerous game double rifles is bigger than I thought. Strong economy and all allows folks to buy 10-150k rifles, and put a red dot on em (Evidently, express sights don't work anymore?????)

Or, marketing people have decided the best way to improve on a Rolls Royce is to put a toaster on the hood.

Read More

 

[DB is Here]

Much like someone buying an $75,000 pick-up then putting bulls balls on it...

 

[Capn Jack]

Sounds like a case of, "Old Eyes" to me.

Personally, I've had to have fiber optic, (Orange) front
sight blades put on all of my handguns.

It's tough getting old, but it sure beats the alternative....

 

[Certaindeaf]

Sounds like a case of, "Old Eyes" to me.View attachment 623124

Personally, I've had to have fiber optic, (Orange) front
sight blades put on all of my handguns.

It's tough getting old, but it sure beats the alternative....

If you can afford a $50,000 gun you can probably swing $300 for some laser eyeball surgery.

 

[Eric in Oregon]

If you can afford a $50,000 gun you can probably swing $300 for some laser eyeball surgery.

... 'laser eyeball surgery' isn't magic, you know. It works but only for a few years, and even then it's more like wearing contacts than rolling back the odometer.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Esthetics are appreciated, but if one's eyes need help (and it's your firearm) do what you think best.

 

[cigars]

Seen a tv show recently.

They were hunting cape buff in Africa with double rifle......which is nice and normal.

The fly in the ointment was, the double rifles were fitted with Aimpoint sights.

Maybe the glow in the dark optic for dangerous game double rifles is bigger than I thought. Strong economy and all allows folks to buy 10-150k rifles, and put a red dot on em (Evidently, express sights don't work anymore?????)

Or, marketing people have decided the best way to improve on a Rolls Royce is to put a toaster on the hood.

If I spend $150k on a rifle, I want that thing to not only shoot the big game but afterwards deliver a hot burger made from it on a plate to me before I had a chance to light a ceee-gar.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Tony Makris used to use double barrel rifles in his tv show "Under Wild Skies", but I don't see him any longer.

Probably due to his shooting an elephant, toasting his shot with champagne and then the vegetable eating only snowflakes went into emotional meltdown and lobbied against him.

P.S. I have an elephant hide gunbelt I bought from Beltman a few years back. It's my favorite.

 

[Flatfish]

Under Wild Skies.....Think they are sponsored by Blaser. So, that might explain why we are seeing what we are seeing rifle wise.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Flatfish,

Wut?

 

[Certaindeaf]

Esthetics are appreciated, but if one's eyes need help (and it's your firearm) do what you think best.

There's nothing more robust than good express sights on a good double. Elerctronical doodad not so much.

 

[Flatfish]

Wut?

Under Wild Skies started off with lotsa attention on doubles in Africa.

I'm pretty sure Blaser (Arms maker) sponsors the show. Which is why they are seemingly using Blaser bolt rifles now, instead of Holland & Holland Royal Doubles (With Aimpoint sight).

Make sense?

 

[ferret427]

I don't see any problem with using a red dot (or insert any product made in the last 75 years) on any platform. If it works, use it. Unless you want to re-live Quigley Down Under, why not use a modern optic? Dangerous game hunts cost a chunk of change, and whatever you think will help to make a clean kill should not be discarded simply for 'but muh esthetics' crap.

The purpose of the rifle in this case is to hunt and harvest a big dangerous animal. Who cares what the weapon looks like. If it works, go for it. Hunting ain't a fashion show. Who cares what a component costs. If the tool works use it.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Flatfish,

Thanks!

ferret427,

You and I are on the same page.

 

[Camelfilter]

Haven't seen what you all are talking about, no cable.

Is it possible what folks are thinking is an red dot on the doubles, may be some type of point of view camera also? Given that it's a show?

Just tossing that out there.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Aimpoints on a double rifle...
Nope not for me.

When watching a hunting or shooting show...and seeing that the show is sponsored by Acme rifles and Coyote camouflage...then I am not surprised that Acme rifles and Coyote camouflage are used or talked about on the show....that may be the case in the OP.....

With that said...
Who really cares what others use , as long as they shoot and use it safely.
It will not ruin my enjoyment of hunting and shooting.

My only concern here is , that at times , some folks , think that you can buy skill with the use of or the reliance on a item....
Skill only comes with understanding what you are doing and the good practice of said skill.
Andy

 

[Flatfish]

Maybe all the PH's will start using Aimpoints on their doubles!

Maybe we should repaint the Mona Lisa..... so she is wearing a denim jacket, has a face tattoo and blonde hair. After all, modern is good.

For the education of those who did not see said show, critters were shot at short range. Well under 100 yards. Typical for dangerous game.

Double rifles are not normally a hyper accurate system. 2-3" at 50 yards is reasonable expectation. So long range accuracy capability is not a consideration.

Express sights (Like those on rifles used in said show) are perfect for this kind of work. I've never heard of the batteries on a set of express sights going dead. Never heard of any electrical gremlins on express sights.

Had they mounted this sight on a bolt rifle, I don't have this reaction. But it was a double. A nice double.

There is such a thing as blasphemy.

 

[ferret427]

@AndyinEverson, take this with a grain...I believe it may not be possible to buy skill, bit it is absolutely possible to buy performance, which can achieve the same result.

It got to the point that I couldn't see my front sight on my AR, so I got an Eotech. Problem solved. I had a budget build rifle that was ok for accuracy, but I wanted more, so I bought a custom action, Krieger barrel and bedded my stock. Problem solved.

I see all the time about how 'it is not the arrow but the Indian' , a reference to the idea that if a person is a capable shot, then the tool does not matter. I disagree with this notion. I believe that equipment is as important as skill, and even more, that understanding of the task at hand is most important.

Take competitive shooting. Pick your flavor. No one who is competing at a high level is using a plain Jane whatever. The reason is that it is not ' just the Indian', but also the arrow.

This can apply to new or poor (for whatever reason) shooters. If your gear is not up to the task, you will be able to realize results that matter.

My brother in law has basically zero experience in shooting. He bought an AR and we have shot it several times. He would get 4-6 moa at 100 yards from it and I was basically half that. That is skill/experience/knowledge difference. When we shoot my custom .308, we both are 1.25 to .5 moa at 100 yards. I realize that at that distance many factors of external ballistics play very minor role at that range, but I want to illustrate that gear can make a difference, even at novice levels of shooting.

I have always believed (for guns, computers, tools, or anything else) that one should buy the best one can afford. This philosophy will help to minimize uncertainty of performance based on equipment and allow focus on skill.

Basically, if your kit sucks, expect results accordingly. If you kit does not suck, but your outcomes suck, work on your skill. You cannot predict what is wrong if you have both inexperience and cheap gear. Even when starting out, get good gear so you know when something goes wrong, you know it is you and not your gear.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Maybe if someone made a $25K super-tactical, nuclear powered reflex sight it would seem a little more appropriate?

 

[No_Regerts]

I don't see any problem with using a red dot (or insert any product made in the last 75 years) on any platform. If it works, use it. Unless you want to re-live Quigley Down Under, why not use a modern optic? Dangerous game hunts cost a chunk of change, and whatever you think will help to make a clean kill should not be discarded simply for 'but muh esthetics' crap.

The purpose of the rifle in this case is to hunt and harvest a big dangerous animal. Who cares what the weapon looks like. If it works, go for it. Hunting ain't a fashion show. Who cares what a component costs. If the tool works use it.

If express sights won't work on your DANGEROUS GAME hunt, don't hunt dangerous game. Use a little introspect and realize that you're not up to it anymore. That way, you won't have some buffalo do the villiage stomp on you, or worse yet, some poor tracker.

Im not an elitest, but its the same thing as using a strike indicator with a fly rod. If you wanna fish with a bobber, go fish with the rest of the gear guys. No shame in it.