peep sights on the actual stock

>>34498665
loose zero

>>34498667
I guess, I couldn't find too many pictures of them. My google fu isn't very strong. But I was talking more like on an modern rifle and maybe if the rifle was built with the peep sight on the stock when it was in the factory. What about then?

Or do you mean it's more likely to get bent or knocked around losing it's zero?

They did, and they're still made today. The real question you want to ask is why peep sights as a whole didn't take off WW2 and later.

File: tangsight_zps3b066224.jpg (42KB, 800x644px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 800x644px

Because it works better if you can mount them to the metal receiver tang. And it's generally considered even better if you can mount it to the receiver itself.

>>34498665
What if the stock breaks or warps?

>>34498688
Wood warps with heat and humidity. Every stock has its own grain patterns and warp.

>>34498665
Slower and harder to acquire a sight picture.

File: wait.png (82KB, 1736x1001px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1736x1001px

>>34498830
Explain...

>>34498859
Good point, but what about something with a metal and polymer stock, for example an AR-15, something I think a lot of people are familiar with. polymer and metal stock doesn't expand and warp as much.

>>34498868
Does it? Well I can't really imagine why but I'll take your word for it.

>>34498917
polymer warps a lot with temperature changes.

And metal has its own problems

>>34498917
Same reason you can align the sights on an AK faster than an M1 garand.

>>34498665
peep sights are an ungodly abomination that came up when fudds lacked the money to buy optical sights but still wanted to look rich - they are worse than all other styles of sights.

>>34498937
thanks I didn't actually know that. I'm a pretty novice shooter so I don't know too much within the realm of practicalities

>>34498996
now this is just patently false.

peep >>> buckhorn

>>34498665
wood warps and flexes with humidity

>>34499050
>buckhorn sights
What in the ungodly hell are those??? People actually buy those and use them?? How in the hell ..... why....how...

>>34499069
well they were popular in the wild west afaik, very fast to acquire sight picture but obviously less accurate

>>34499267
they were? Shit they must be really quick to acquire because I can't even shoot accurately with buck-horn sights in killing floor 2 let alone with an actual gun.

>>34499057

This.

>>34498996
you know with proper peep sights it works basically the same as a red dot. your eye naturally aligns the poat in the center of the peep, all youve really got to do is put the post over whatever you want to shoot. i find it a lot easier with longer sight radiuses, things like the m4 make it difficult but that might also be because of all the extra shit weve got to keep on it.

>>34498996
Thanks for putting down your cheetos and sippy cup long enough to make such a quality post.

>>34498665
That sight looks like it would get in the way of both your grip and the bolt.

>>34499069
>>34499321
Then you're using them wrong. The notch at the bottom of the buckhorn is for really close up shots, the center of the buckhorn is used at medium ranges just like a peep sight, and the horns at the very top is for when you're shooting far away.

>>34498665
Has anyone seen anything like this on handguns?

>>34498907
Because the joining of the barrel to the receiver is less-likely to flex than the joining of the wooden stock to the barreled-action.

>>34498937
>implying this is true

Aperture sights are the end all of be all of sights. Don't get it twisted.

>>34501438
this.

Aperture is incredibly fast when it comes to sight picture acquisition.

>>34501438
>>34502464
It is a target sight not a combat sight.