I sent this note to Remington for an explanation, but I figure I might get a better answer here.
I got a new rifle for Christmas, a Remington 597, and I am anxious to get 'er out to the range! I will be mounting a scope on this rifle, as my eyes are two old to focus the front sight, anymore--unless I put on some readers (which I do bring with me to the range). Anyway, I am a Hunter Education instructor, so I am very familiar with sight alignment, a topic we typically illustrate with a blade front sight and notch rear sight. The sight picture varies, a little, though.
The sight picture we typically teach in Hunter Education is the "6 o'clock" (or lollipop) hold, where the top blade is held exactly underneath the bull. One can imagine trying to balance a ball (the bull) atop the flat upper surface of the blade. And the rear sight is also a simple rectangle with a rectangular notch cut out of the upper edge.
As a pistol shooter, I have also learned to use the same sight alignment as for any blade sight, but instead of the 6 o'clock hold, we are taught to bisect the bull with the top edge of the blade front sight. (For pistols, all shots are at such close range that MOA considers are practically nil.)
But the front sight on the 597 is a bead, not a blade. And the rear sight is not a perfect rectangle, either. The rear sight is a rectangle with a "U"-shaped notch. And the upper edge of the rectangle is not straight. Instead the upper edge of the rear sight tapers downward ever so slightly from the top corners of the rectangle to the top edge of the "U" notch.
I know it should be straight forward, but I really don't know the proper sight alignment and sight picture on this sight arrangement. Furthermore, I have searched Google extensively, hoping to find an explanation, but to no avail. Should I attempt to place the front bead entirely between the "U"? Or should I be trying to "balance a wheel on a string"? And for sight picture, should I be aiming for stacking the bull atop the bead ("stacking BBs")? I look forward to your explanation, and I would love it if you could provide an illustration suitable for my Hunter Education classes.
From your description it sounds a little like the Ruger 10/22 factory sights. Does the attached illustration help?
UL
Unbridled,
Yes, the illustration is helpful, even though the Rem. 597 rear sights are still considerably different than that of the Ruger 10/22. I wish I had an illustration of them, but I have been unable to locate one. It seems the Ruger rear sight can be described as a square notch with a "U" in the bottom of the notch. As would have been my first guess, it seems the alignment goal is to make the round bead perfectly fill the bottom of the "U" with an evenly spaced, annular circle of light around the bottom and sides of the bead. And The top of the bead seems also to be flush with the bottom of the square notch. And then the (triangular?) bull sits atop the brass bead. Does that sound like an ample description of the sight alignment/sight picture goal for the Ruger 10/22 irons?
At least both are bead front sights. Whereas the Ruger bead (from my recollection--I don't own one) is a blade with a solid brass ball at the tip of the post, the Remington bead is actually a cylinder atop the post with a spherical depression in the end of the cylinder. The depression in the cylinder is filled with white paint (common in pistol sights). But I suspect that the alignment goals are very similar, even though a verbal description of the Rem. 597 rear sight would be insufficient--really need a diagram like the one you showed.
Oh, and can you explain the purpose of the little diamond at the bottom of the Ruger rear sight? I'm not sure what one is expected to do with that.
Hi b1rdd0g. I think this graphic will help. "A" seems to be what you are describing.
DrRichP,
Thanks for the reply and for the reference slide. Believe it or not, though, the Remington 597 sight matches none of those. I'd say that it is kind of a combination of E and D. It is almost like E, except that the top of the rear sight is canted inward like that of D. And the "U" that surrounds the cylindrical front sight is much smaller and has much less "white" space in there than what is shown. It would be nice if I knew how to describe the diameter (which I can measure at about 0.100") of the front sight "bead" in terms of MOA. For sake of completeness, the width of the "U" notch is about 0.060"). I guess if I knew the distance from my eyeball to the front sight, I'd have myself a geometry problem that I could solve to find the MOA of that bead. But it is the wee hours of the morning, right now. So as Scarlet O'Hara so famously said:
"I don't want to think about that right now. I'll think about that tomorrow."
b1rdd0g-
I don't own a 597, nor have I handled one extensively. That said, based on your description, I would offer the following advice based on similarly designed sight systems.
Quoteit seems the alignment goal is to make the round bead perfectly fill the bottom of the "U" with an evenly spaced, annular circle of light around the bottom and sides of the bead.
This description is what I would focus on- you have a "U" shape in the rear sight, and a circular front sight. Mate the bottom of the front sight with the "U" shaped depression in the rear sight, maintaining equal amounts of daylight on either side of the front sight.
What you are looking for in *any* sight alignment is consistency- if you can consistently attain the exact same sight alignment, you can make adjustments to either the sights or to your sight picture to account for point of impact.
I would also suggest that you strongly consider the aftermarket sights from Tech Sights: http://www.tech-sights.com/rem.htm
The sight picture created by these sights is quite similar to one would would have on any of the US military-issue service rifles in the last 75+ years. An excellent product, an excellent company, and a dramatic improvement in sight picture. If you decide to go with the tech sights, let 'em know Appleseed sent ya.
-ItsanSKS
ItsanSKS,
Thank you for your reply. I agree that the most important aspect is to maintain consistency of sight alignment, regardless whether I can easily guess the intentions of the designer of the sight, or not.
As for peep sights, those are problematic, for me. I have often heard about how "anybody" can use them effectively, how they self-correct vision problems, etc. But as an RK (Radial Keratotomy) patient, I am a special case. That surgical procedure left me with astigmatism and problems with double images. Rather than forming a round, fuzzy halo around my FOV, I see what appears to be an oval racetrack shaped double image (on an axis roughly NW by SE). And regardless whether I am using peeps or irons, I have acute presbyopia (aka "old eyes that make my arms too short to read anything"). The best solution, for me, has been to get hold of some full frame readers that, while less than my usual reader prescription, are sufficient to allow me to bring the front sight into focus. They make everything in my world blurry, so they are only of use on the firing line, but it allows me to function, to some small extent.
B1- have you tried the pinhole eyeglasses modification to see what that does to your sight picture?
UL
I thought I would share the response I got back from Remington to my original post:
The bottom portion of the "U" notch will match the profile of the front bead. This will allow you to "pumpkin on a post" seat the sight in the bottom of the notch and then 6 o'clock your target. We do not have a dedicated sight reference other than the one in your owner's manual.
BTW, there is nothing in the Remington 597 Owners Manual that attempts to illustrate the expected sight picture, so I don't know what he was referring to, unless he means the illustration showing the elevation and windage adjustments on the rear sight.
I took the time, today, to do the calculations to determine what angle is subtended by my front sight bead in MOA. I knew it might be kinda big, but I had no idea! I calculated 11.75 MOA!! So, since neither I nor Remington nor anyone else has ever posted any pictures of the Rem 597 open sights, I did a "best effort" to draw the sight picture to scale. What I have shown is what a 4 MOA bull would look like atop my 12 MOA front bead at 25 yds. If I decide to go with a 50 yd zero, I should expect my group to be just under 1/2" high at 25 yds. Now if only I could get well enough to take this bad boy out to the range!