karlunity Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Fellas I have never understood why European milsup rifles don't have a windage adjustment, (short of pounding the front sight with a hammer). Don't they have wind in Europe????? Do ALL the troops in the armies have the same eyesight?????? karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamprat Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Comrad Karl, The windage on our guns is on rear sight not the front. No one wants to go to the front. From your friends on the Volva. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzRednek Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Fellas I have never understood why European milsup rifles don't have a windage adjustment, (short of pounding the front sight with a hammer). Don't they have wind in Europe????? Do ALL the troops in the armies have the same eyesight?????? karl I've wondered the same thing and I can only speculate that it was probably more cost effective to issue tools to move the front sight. Supposedly they leave the factory sighted in but I had a couple of all matching 98/22's that were way off, like 12 inches at 50 yards. I've only moved a few with a brass hammer and it was a big pain in the rear. After you move the sight you have to beat on it to keep it in place and hope it doesn't move from recoil. Unless your the patient type I'd avoid moving one unless it is really necessary. Once the sight is moved it usually loosens up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlunity Posted April 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 "Once the sight is moved it usually loosens up. " That is true Az. Perhaps, since these rifles were designed in the 19 century, the age of tight mass formations of troops, the idea was that as you will be firing into a mass of troops, fine wind-age was not neccescity. If your windage is off, you just hit the guy on the right or left...same difference a dead foe.???? karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoedoh Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 Comrad Karl, A couple things come to mind: 1. The armies of the late 19th and early 20th century Europe weren't very sophisticated and clung to their historic roots. For example, they fielded manually operated repeating rifles up till we clobbered them in 1945. As such, the prevailing wisdom of the day dictated that windage shall be set by the armourers by staking the front site in place. Once that was done, there should be no need for the soldiers to tinker with it. 2. The soldiers in the armies of the late 19th and early 20th century Europe had phenominal eyesight. If you don't believe me, take your glasses off and try and sight your Mauser in on a NRA 100 meter centerfire target. I'll be you can't; I'm 26 and I sure as heck can't. Clearly though, the soldier who originally carried the rifle did and so too did his brothers-in-arms - otherwise, how in the hell did the European powers manage to conquer so much of the planet with these implements of battle? That's why these fine European battle rifles come with such ergonomic sighting systems (or at least, that's my best guess). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlunity Posted April 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 You may well have a point. I remember reading that before mass reading and especially TV. It was reported that people did have better eyesight. I know that the older WW II guys commented that a lot of the Nam era guys, who wore specs, would "never have been allowed in the old Corps". karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.