Advice on 10/22 Peep Sights

[JJ45]

Anyone have a receiver peep on their 10/22?...mine is the 18" standard carbine.

It now wears a Burris 1-4x20 compact but I have another scope sighted 22 and was thinking of simplifying and slimming her down some.

Any opinions or advice on a good one?

[aarondhgraham]

You might like Tech Sights,,,
They are recommended by the Appleseed organization.

I had a pair of their sights on my Mossberg 702 Plinkster,,,
They were excellent for me until my eyes got so bad and I went to a scope.

Hope this helps,,,

Aarond

.

[mikejonestkd]

I agree with Aarond, get tech sights.

I have the SR200 Aperture Sight for Ruger 10/22 @ https://www.tech-sights.com/ruger-products/

they are excellent

[dgludwig]

I'm very happy with the Williams peep sight (WGRS-RU-22) and the Williams gold bead front sight set (570 M, 1/16") I installed on my 10/22 "International" model rifle.

[idek]

I've also been pleased with Tech-sights, but here's a similar consideration.
https://www.nodakspud.com/NDS-22.htm
Scroll down to see different front and rear sight options. I bought one of their front sights (NDS-44) because it fit on my tapered barrel that does NOT have the front sight ramp, and Tech-sights didn't have something like that.

The NODAK has more of a matte appearance and the front sight is adjusted with an AK/SKS sight tool while the Tech-sights front sight is adjusted with an AR sight tool. I like them about the same from a sight picture perspective.

I haven't used one of the NODAK rear sights though (the NODAK front sight works well with my Tech-sights rear sight).

[JJ45]

Thanks for the info....Tech Sights...100 or 200?...any opinions on which?

[Charlie98]

I've got TechSights on my 10/22... they are certainly serviceable, if not the best looking sights. I mounted them for an Appleseed and they worked well enough. If you are shooting standard distances the 100 model is fine, if you are going to be shooting beyond 100M you might consider the 200.

Personally, I've gone to the Williams peep, it's not as easily adjustable as the TechSights, but it's profile is much lower, and you can use the factory FSP.

[pblanc]

Originally Posted by JJ45

Thanks for the info....Tech Sights...100 or 200?...any opinions on which?

There is also the TSR-200 RL which is very similar to the TSR-200 rear sight but mounts on the central portion of the stock Ruger accessory rail, or any other similar type 3/8" dovetail rail. That can be an attractive option for someone who wants to have a rail mounted to the receiver to allow the rifle to be used with a red dot sight in conjunction with the Tech Sights or allow one to switch between using iron sights and a rifle scope.

Both the TSR-200 and the TSR-200 RL have a single peep aperture that is adjustable for both windage and elevation. Tech Sights sells a little tool to adjust elevation with these sights. Dialing the peep aperture up and down can be a little tricky till you get the hang of it, but allows elevation adjustments to be made at the rear sight as well as at the front. That can be useful if you run out of elevation adjustment at your front sight post.

The TSR-100 had a double flip aperture that allows for rough and rapid ballistic compensation. I have not used this model so I don't know how well it works. Per Tech Sights, with the sight radius of the Ruger 10/22 with 18 1/2" barrel, if you zero at 50 yards with the close range aperture and flip to the long range aperture, you should be close to zero at 100 yards. My experience with various ballistic drop calibration rifle scopes leads me to believe that this well depend considerably on the ammunition used.

The TSR-200 RL sight works quite well and I'm sure the same can be said for the TSR-200. All of the Tech Sight sets for the Ruger 10/22 use the same type of AR-15 A1 style front sight posts that have 5 detent notches on the front sight post flange rather than the 4 detent notches of the A2 type front sight post. This allows a little finer elevation adjustment than the A2 type of post, but does not allow the use of a front sight post with a square profile. The thread size and pitch of the Tech Sight front sight post is standard, however, so you can swap the front sight post with an A2 style post if you wish.

[JJ45]

Originally Posted by Charlie_98

I've got TechSights on my 10/22... they are certainly serviceable, if not the best looking sights. I mounted them for an Appleseed and they worked well enough. If you are shooting standard distances the 100 model is fine, if you are going to be shooting beyond 100M you might consider the 200.

Personally, I've gone to the Williams peep, it's not as easily adjustable as the TechSights, but it's profile is much lower, and you can use the factory FSP.

Good info from all, although I do have the factory rail mounted now not really interested in red dots, etc for this Ruger...if I go to a peep, i'll probably go the direct to receiver mount. I thought about the Williams and didn't know it would work very well with the stock FS.

I am worried about running out of adjustment with the stock FS plus I do like a flat top post with a peep but if it works well I might give it a shot.

[BBarn]

I am happy with the Williams WGRS-RU22 rear peep on my 10/22. I also purchased their recommended gold bead front sight (higher). The front looks just like the factory bead except it's higher. I believe the factory front would be too low for use with the rear peep.

[TBM900]

As soon as I saw the title I knew I would see tons of posts mentioning TechSights.
While they are nice and I do have them on a couple rifles myself....

I honestly believe Skinner peeps are much MUCH better.
ESPECIALLY if you are wanting to slim down the profile and weight.

Skinners in and of themselves are nice, but the bulk and weight is way overkill and I think they crap up the looks of the gun. Skinners actually compliment the look along with being tough, functional, and practical. Lots more aperture options as well.

[Charlie98]

...if I go to a peep, i'll probably go the direct to receiver mount. I thought about the Williams and didn't know it would work very well with the stock FS.

I forgot... the 10/22 isn't a dovetail receiver, you have to mount a rail. The factory FSP would certainly not be high enough, but as BBarn mentions, Williams has a fix for that, too.

[idek]

I honestly believe Skinner peeps are much MUCH better.
ESPECIALLY if you are wanting to slim down the profile and weight.

Skinners in and of themselves are nice, but the bulk and weight is way overkill and I think they crap up the looks of the gun. Skinners actually compliment the look along with being tough, functional, and practical. Lots more aperture options as well.

I haven't tried Skinner sights on my 10/22, but I have three sets I've used on other guns.
Skinners are certainly less bulky than the Tech-Sights, but the weight is pretty similar (steel vs. aluminum)

I still prefer Tech-Sight for several reasons. In order...

1) the aperture sight is about 1.5" closer to the eye on the Tech-Sights vs. the Skinner. Apertures work best when they are closer to the eye and actually enhance the shooter's visual acuity.

2) the aperture being farther back also means the sight radius in 1.5" longer. The longer sight radius reduces the effect minor aiming errors have on POI.

3) Elevation and windage adjustments on the Tech-Sights are precise and repeatable. If you need to change your settings for a different type of ammo, you can easily revert back to the original settings later on. Skinner sight adjustments are basically guess-and-check... loosen a tiny screw, slide back and forth arbitrarily for windage. For elevation, twist the aperture in 180-degree increments one way or another, then eyeball it up to determine if it's truly perpendicular to the bore when you're done. Any time you change ammo, you're starting from scratch, as there are no marks on the sight to even help you attempt remember what you had before.

4) Tech-Sights rear sights are co-designed with matching front posts that WILL work together. Various places on the Skinner website mention how they can't say what front sight you'll need to go with your rear sight. Most will NOT work with your factory front sight, but they won't say what height you'll probably need.

5) Tech-Sights customer service has been more helpful in my experience. I lost a screw from their front sight assembly (I didn't use Loc-Tite as they recommended). I contacted them, and they sent a replacement screw for free the same day. I'd read that their T-100 assembly could accept standard AR apertures (the front sight assembly also takes AR front posts). I wrote to ask about it and within a day received a detailed response explaining how the aperture could be swapped. Two other times I've written inquiring about products. Response were always quick and thorough. On the other hand, any inquiries to Skinner get very short, generic responses that amount to, "you'll just have to try (buy) the product and see if it works or not."

6) My Tech-Sights look the same today as the day I got them years ago. All three sets of my blued Skinner sights rust very quickly (the blued guns they are attached to hardly rust at all).

7) Skinner sights cost about 60% more than Tech-Sights to get a front and rear sight.

Again, I've bought 3 sets of Skinners, so I obviously appreciate them on some level, and they DO look nice on a gun. But I always feel a bit dissatisfied when I'm actually shooting with them and never do as well with them accuracy-wise as I do with the Tech-Sights.

[JJ45]

Originally Posted by idek

I haven't tried Skinner sights on my 10/22, but I have three sets I've used on other guns.
Skinners are certainly less bulky than the Tech-Sights, but the weight is pretty similar (steel vs. aluminum)

I still prefer Tech-Sight for several reasons. In order...

1) the aperture sight is about 1.5" closer to the eye on the Tech-Sights vs. the Skinner. Apertures work best when they are closer to the eye and actually enhance the shooter's visual acuity.

2) the aperture being farther back also means the sight radius in 1.5" longer. The longer sight radius reduces the effect minor aiming errors have on POI.

3) Elevation and windage adjustments on the Tech-Sights are precise and repeatable. If you need to change your settings for a different type of ammo, you can easily revert back to the original settings later on. Skinner sight adjustments are basically guess-and-check... loosen a tiny screw, slide back and forth arbitrarily for windage. For elevation, twist the aperture in 180-degree increments one way or another, then eyeball it up to determine if it's truly perpendicular to the bore when you're done. Any time you change ammo, you're starting from scratch, as there are no marks on the sight to even help you attempt remember what you had before.

4) Tech-Sights rear sights are co-designed with matching front posts that WILL work together. Various places on the Skinner website mention how they can't say what front sight you'll need to go with your rear sight. Most will NOT work with your factory front sight, but they won't say what height you'll probably need.

5) Tech-Sights customer service has been more helpful in my experience. I lost a screw from their front sight assembly (I didn't use Loc-Tite as they recommended). I contacted them, and they sent a replacement screw for free the same day. I'd read that their T-100 assembly could accept standard AR apertures (the front sight assembly also takes AR front posts). I wrote to ask about it and within a day received a detailed response explaining how the aperture could be swapped. Two other times I've written inquiring about products. Response were always quick and thorough. On the other hand, any inquiries to Skinner get very short, generic responses that amount to, "you'll just have to try (buy) the product and see if it works or not."

6) My Tech-Sights look the same today as the day I got them years ago. All three sets of my blued Skinner sights rust very quickly (the blued guns they are attached to hardly rust at all).

7) Skinner sights cost about 60% more than Tech-Sights to get a front and rear sight.

Again, I've bought 3 sets of Skinners, so I obviously appreciate them on some level, and they DO look nice on a gun. But I always feel a bit dissatisfied when I'm actually shooting with them and never do as well with them accuracy-wise as I do with the Tech-Sights.

Great case for T Sights, great advice from ALL from TFL...I have Skinners on a custom 1917, apples to oranges though. I also have XS sights on a Marlin 336 and Win 1300, opened up ghost ring and I like them, It's funny no one mentioned XS and I didn't think of them myself at first.

I'll probably go with Tech Sights. XS are considerably more expensive though their customer service is also very good...also Tech Sights would be something different from what I have.