I explored the same problem with a BRN22 integral 1913 rail on the receiver... I was going to cut a dove tail in one of the cross slots and use something like a 10/22 rear sight.... but ended up with an AR conversion platform....


just a comment about my aperture sight... I just started to shoot an SBR for RFRI with a Striplin flip up front fiber optic on the rail, and a carry handle rear, originally with the large aperture.... I drilled out the smaller aperture in increments to find the best sight picture for my old eyes... sooted the inside of the shiny hole with some carbonizing flame from a Bic lighter... it centers the fiber optic dot better and still gives a pretty good field of view... the aperture allows me to hold elevation better than the fiber optic front sight on my MKIV with a TacSol F/O front... regards


edit... I used a 5/32" drill to open the small aperture... works well for me

 

I use a UTG, I use it on multiple different rifles with picatinney rails

https://www.ebay.com/itm/384415211177?epid=2254427320&hash=item5980ee9ea9:g:pCQAAOSw1BlhUVkl

 

Plus 1 for the UTG aperture sight, simple, but effective. I use it on a 10/22 build.

 

Why non-aperture? Aps are more efficient and effective, for good reasons they are universally used by 'iron-sights only' match shooters.
Btw, be aware that any sight mounted atop a pic-rail is going to require a pretty high front sight. Get the rear sight first! That will allow you to determine how high the front needs to be via use of a temporary 'try-sight'.

 

"for good reasons they are universally used by 'iron-sights only' match shooters."

Is this true of speed/steel shooters?
I have only shot steel with a pistol, and thought that an aperture sight for shooting large plates of steel at short distances would not be very quick as optimizing accuracy should be(?) sacrificed for speed of acquiring and moving from target plate to plate.

 

Depends a lot on the front sight height. If not too high XS makes a low mount peep that mounts on a pic rail and has a decent amount of adjustment. XS also makes a high mount as does UTG. Williams also has a rail mount peep.

 

In all the shooting games Ive been in where 'peeps' were allowed the usual winners and placers were using such so I did too, needed all the help I could get. I never have done SC so Idk, shouldnt have said 'universally'.
They dont have to be tiny apertures to be effective, and acquisition/'alignment' is quicker.
Note that the military has used them for decades, as well as lots of hunters, not just 'target shooters'.

 

Never understood the open sights only thing. They were OK for young eyes but it sure eliminates most older eyed competitors. An accomplished aperture shooter can equal or nearly equal groups shot by scoped competitors,

Only problem is you can get much smaller groups and be able to shoot smaller targets than most of us can see without magnification. I have 4 MOA steel targets from 25 to 197 yards which might sound huge but in some light conditions they can be hard to acquire. Groups on them are usually 2 MOA or less.

I always tell everyone that if you can see the target no matter the distance you can hit it just as easily as with a scope. 1000 yard hits are surprisingly easy and my Son has dinged the 1 mile 18" circle at Thunder Valley with his peep sighted 6XC.

Everyone that I've sat behind one of my old peep sighted guns have hit my clay pigeon sized target at 195 yards and are amazed it's so easy. Metallic sights can be very accurate (old IHMSA days) but takes good eyes to use.

Some of the newer multi-distance rimfire games don't lend themselves to peeps but longrange matches can offer a whole new challenge for us nostalgic gun shooters. Can't just dial all those distances, lots of counting and a possibility of getting lost but is so satisfying to hear that distant "ding" . Start taking into account not being able to see your hits/misses and tweaking your hold for varying wind it amazes me their accuracy potential.

Topstrap

 

Although regular 25/50/100 yard paper target shooting using iron sights has been a thing of the past for me for a couple of decades (eyes), I have no problem believing aperture sights are the bomb for this. But for acquiring and hitting five 18" x 24" painted steel plates at 15 to 50 yards in 5 seconds? (The good guys do it in 2 seconds.) I can't believe trying to locate the front post through an aperture is the way to go. I don't want to go "optical", which is a red dot type for most guys.

 

The eye/brain tends to automatically want to center the front sight in the circle of the rear aperture.
With open sights you have to consciously try to align the front sight in the rear notch, regardless of shape; for many (most?) of us as we age the eye does not accommodate that well. Trying to keep the light even on both sides of the notch and the top of the front level with the rear ears means we try to focus on the front but are constantly going back and forth front to rear to maintain that alignment and still properly squeeze to get the shot off while on target.
This is not conjecture on my part, Im sure you can find plenty of info online with an easy search.
There are rear sight replacement blades made for some handguns to give you a relatively large 'ghost ring' aperture.
I will grant that you may be one that can do well with open sights. If so, Im envious. And maybe, in the game(s) you want to play, it is more of an instinctive shooting rather than really using the sights anyway?
Best way to find out is talk with the folks that do well and practice what they preach.

 

Since I already had Redfield Olympic rear sights, I bought a Lipski base which clamps on the 10/22 rail.

 

Follow-Up

Just a follow-up to my original post, subsequent to my first two-gun Steel Challenge match. (I had previously shot one steel match with a pistol only.)

I did purchase two rear sights, including the recommended UTG sight (nice), and one front sight, but ended up not using any of these. (I'll save them for possible later use for Silhouette shooting.) Instead, I made a bushing/collar from acetyl plastic that fit onto the thick "muzzle-weighted" end of the barrel and secured it with small (#6-32) SS set screws. I made the sight post from an allen head screw, and painted it fluorescent orange. (I had previously painted the front post of my BuckMark Target this way.) For a rear sight I used, well, not much. I drew a stripe down the center of the Picatinny rail with a magic marker. The combined result is much like a shotgun sight, allowing fast acquisition and a very open viewing/sight picture, with more than enough accuracy for hitting the steel plates of a Steel Challenge match. I did a quick 25yard test off the back porch using a front rest, and packed the rifle for the range.

I ended up with a mid-pack score (5th of 11), not very fast (yet?) but fairly accurate, with no procedural errors. Of note is that I do not think any of the misses were with the rifle, just a couple with the pistol. The guns of the other ten shooters included a few iron sighted, but most were fitted with red-dot/electronic optics.

At least for now I'm going to stick with this set-up, as it seems to work perfectly well for Steel Challenge shooting. But then, I'm not really concerned with winning, just enjoy the shooting. I'm currently using this same rifle and pistol, with 4-16X Bushnell 4200 and 3-9X Burris scopes mounted respectively, for Silhouette shooting. I'll continue to have a blast shooting rimfire this winter (NRL22/PRS, Steel Challenge and Silhouette) spending as little $$$ as I can using guns and scopes/sights that I already have, or I can work-up inexpensively.

 

Well done :bthumb:
KISS Principle is a great place to start