• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Flint lock sights...

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
WellI go for a lower profile of rear sight. Adjust the front sight with a straight file as needed after you paper a few shots. New sights from Kibler may be a solution for you.
As for me I replaced the Kibler sights (Woods Runner) with the Tom A Hawk rear and a piano key (real Ivory) front/Ed
 
Hi Mad L.

The sights are on my must do list, and as I think I commented, I like the somewhat lower sights on the older Miroku flinter, I may copy those.
It may take a bit, but I'll post what I come up with on this thread.

Best@

Steve
 
I would get a set of Kibler sights and reset your sights Bench at a given distance and set distances by various powder charges. Ditch the Ped sights.
I like brass front sights, not sure I like that Kibler rear though...I am thinking something a little....less.
 
So you haven't shot either rifle to see where they print.
To get an idea of how much you need to file the sights, especially the front blades.
There is a calculation that will tell you what height sights to use or regulate to, based on where the holes are at 25 yards.
I prefer first sight ins to be at 12 yard's. Then do the math to see what height is needed.
Another Factor is ,one, everybody's eyes see the sites different.

Two, depending on the light outside whether you're shooting under a cover, it's sunny or overcast. Those sites are going to look different especially the silver/brass blades.

Three ,how much experience does a person have shooting & iron sites.

IMPO take the rifles out and shoot them. Get a feel for them. Then make adjustments. Set the "traditional" hype aside.
 
How much experience does one have shooting Iron Sights?

Is Bass really that much different then Iron?
What other kind of 'sights' is there????
 
Good morning gents. I’m pretty used to irons, use them on several 22s, a 303, even a nice new 45-90 Christian Sharps 1885. I hope nonp-one’s offended as all of those load from the other end! The Miroku is for me perfect, dead on at 50 yards, that with patched ball over 80 grains of FFG. The Pederesoli sights are just IMHO jarringly different, and look / feel too high.

I’ll pull those factory sights off, save them and make something to my aesthetic taste. It’s kind warm here in the Bitterroot, next week is all 95-100 degrees, time to head to the basement and tinker. I appreciate the feedback suggestions, even pictures. Steve.
 
Well I have to agree that the choice of sights is personal, If Kibler is not to your liking that is fine. I have seen many and modified of pitched many depending on the rifle. CVA makes a low profile sight. Kibler is the best for me.
Pratt aka Hornbender
 
Hello All: I'm a recent recruit to the forum, and I really appreciate the warm welcome I have received from many of you!

Now down to business... I would appreciate some thoughts on what might be considered the best / or more original sights, for a 41" 50 cal flintlock.
I have two such rifles, a 1960's Miroku, and a very new, and so far shiny Pedersoli, both 41" barrels, both 50 cal, 1:66 twist for patched ball, and both flinters.

The older Miroku has fixed sights. A rear notch, with shallow angled side ramps, the front sight is a single blade, not too high, and not too "wide".
For me these work well, provide a nice sight picture, and are easily and naturally acquired. Pics below ( this rifle is in the "white")

My new Pedersoli has what I might describe as "overly ambitious" sights, the rear is a very tall adjustable buckhorn... the front a single blade, which IMHO is far too tall.
The stepped rear ramp adjuster may be for varied range adjustment, or hunting reasons... ? Again, pictures are attached. Pedersoli sights are are blued

From web browsing and what I have seen in museums, early flinters had very small sights, some little more than a bump on the barrel top flat.
The rear notch is often just that, a tiny small notch cut in the flat topped rear sight; the front blade, often a tiny, narrow 1/16th inch high brass insert.
The Pedersoli sights IMHO look out of place. They are far too tall, and detract from the otherwise nice aesthetics of the rifle...

Is this just me, or do others find this to be a little unsightly? (sorry for the pun!) If so, has anyone found or made new, more "traditional sights" for such a rifle?
I have a nice basement shop with a mill, lathe, and many other fun toys, so can and may indeed make some new sights for Pedersoli, I was just looking for feedback or examples.

Looking for your $0.02...

Thanks!

Steve
I despise "buckhorn" sights. Most of my unmentionables have peep or eye enhancement tubes.
 
How much experience does one have shooting Iron Sights?

Is Bass really that much different then Iron?
What other kind of 'sights' is there????
A little story. In the late 70s I built a Southern Mtn. rifle and put an iron blade up front. I took it deer hunting for the first time and in the dingy first light here comes several deer down the hill. I threw up the gun and there was no front sight visible. I felt it there but could not see it. I replaced it with a brass blade which shines like a new penny in the woods. You can make a blade out of a silver nickel too which will do the same thing. Avoid iron which are only good for target shooting in good light.
 
A little story. In the late 70s I built a Southern Mtn. rifle and put an iron blade up front. I took it deer hunting for the first time and in the dingy first light here comes several deer down the hill. I threw up the gun and there was no front sight visible. I felt it there but could not see it. I replaced it with a brass blade which shines like a new penny in the woods. You can make a blade out of a silver nickel too which will do the same thing. Avoid iron which are only good for target shooting in good light.
I do agree, I like silver or even brass front sights.
Generally when I think "Iron Sights" I visualize the rear sight...even thou it is the Front sight we focus upon (well really both: 'Equal Sight, Equal Light').

I have tried the 'Lick the sight' thing to add some shine on it, don't work for me, probably a Hollywood thing thou I don't doubt it has been done by many, but for me it doesn't work.

There was a sight once that would make a silver coin, of your preferred Date, into a front sight blade with the date showing.
 
If you are OK with a peep sight that is a much better option. I have one I use to test loads. I made it from a cheap sight off a modern 22. The pads is leather with rosin on it. I make the peep line up with the open sights. The peep brings everything into focus at once.

For official NMLRA shoots you need to use an open sight.
sights.jpg
 
The purpose of buckhorn and semi buckhorn sights is to give you several different range sights all in one rear sight, rather than giving the shooter different folding rears to fiddle with. (A recipe for having the wrong one up when you need to shoot.)

Put the blade top level with the top of the notch for your point blank range, even with the top of the wings on a semi buckhorn for the second, (or the middle of the semi circle of full buckhorns). On full buckhorns where the wings close back together that is your furthest range to put the top of the blade at.

I personally don't much care for either of them because the rear sight obscures too much of the target or background for me. I prefer a wide flat rear sight, and use different marks (I just have one) on my front blade to mark where an intermediate range is. Bottomed with the barrel flat even with the rear sight is my longest range. And with my guns that long range option is essentially only good for volley fire.
 
If you are OK with a peep sight that is a much better option. I have one I use to test loads. I made it from a cheap sight off a modern 22. The pads is leather with rosin on it. I make the peep line up with the open sights. The peep brings everything into focus at once.

For official NMLRA shoots you need to use an open sight.View attachment 249215
NICE!!!!!
 
Gents: Apologies for the tardy responses, I'm on vacation in MT, WY etc... WiFi // cell data etc not always available.

I do however agree with your comments about peep sights... and find them much more convenient with my good ( but focus locked) eyes, cataract surgery to both eyes... argh!
I have a Savage 1919 NRA in .22 with a fine peep sight, and a Christian Sharps Win 1885 in 45-90 with a Sole peep... both are easy to use and greatly help the sighting picture.
Apologies for mentioning "newer" non-ML gun types here.... ;-)

Steve
 
Thanks Ed: An interesting idea, I do like peep sights, and I too have eyes that aren't what they used to be!
Perfect vision after double cataract surgery, yet I cannot focus closer that 15 feet! Argh!

Funny though, the old Miroku's sights somehow "work...."

Steve
You can only focus at one distance at a time. Focus ON the target THROUGH the sights.
I bring up unmentionables only by way of endorsing the tang mounted peep. My Savage 99 has a peep sight that flips up from the tang. Best and neatest thing since the inventions of sneakers and sliced bread.
 
Hello Folks:

I'm now back from my WY / MT travels, where amongst other places, I visited the Cody Firearms museum in Cody, WY. A MUST SEE! Part of my reason for visiting the museum was just to ogle at the superb collection of firearms, but also to take a good look at the period sights on the PA muzzleloading rifles.

I found that many had what I had expected, minimalistic sights, pics below. However, many other rifles, usually the slightly later Hawkens, 1840-60s, often had elaborate and large buckhorn sights, big enough and bold enough to match those of the Pedersoli I own! Maybe these Hawkens required faster sight picture access for large game and possible defence roles? Like all things in life, someone will make or find a better mousetrap.

Here are a few pictures, these are the more traditional small sights, and from these I plan to make a set of replacement sights for my Pedersoli.
Note these early PA 1830's Hawkens had the smaller sights, whilst the later and larger caliber / halfstock models had the buckhorns.

More things to consider,

Best!

Steve 1
 

Attachments

  • 1820's PA flinter .jpg
    1820's PA flinter .jpg
    303.8 KB · Views: 0
  • 1820's PA flinter Front sight.jpg
    1820's PA flinter Front sight.jpg
    536.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 1830's PA Hawken front sight .jpg
    1830's PA Hawken front sight .jpg
    214.8 KB · Views: 0
  • 1830's PA Hawken rear sight.jpg
    1830's PA Hawken rear sight.jpg
    291.2 KB · Views: 0
Back
Top