The Utah Rifle

Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
416
Location
NM
I, for one, at excited about the new iron sight only regulations that Utah is trying out this year. While I wait on the off chance that I drew either of the iron sight units I put in for, I’ve been toying with one of my planned mechanisms for hunting them.

It’s a repurpose of a rifle I screwed, hammered, and wrenched together a few years ago (I hear the term ‘build’ is only for those lucky enough to have a lathe in the home shop) that ended up flopping in use due to a Steiner Cinder thermal with a poor enough interface that I just didn’t like shooting it. So now we rebuild it with a different purpose.

The rifle itself is a small frame AR assembled on an Alexander Arms (Alexander, not Anderson, get your mind out of the parts gutter) lower and a Gibbs side charging upper. The centerpiece is a JP Enterprises 18” SuperMatch barrel in 6.5 Grendel, with an accompanying JP Bolt and LMOS carrier.

IMG_4696.jpeg

Why an AR? For me, it’s hard to think of a better iron sight combo than A2s outside of dedicated Target rifle sights. With a low recoiling round, you can mount the rear sight even further off the back of the receiver for more of a diopter effect, which really helps with sharpening targets against the front sight post at range. The JP barrel maintains its .750 gas block profile all the way to the muzzle, meaning a clamp on front sight block can be mounted farther forward for longer sight radius. I’m simultaneously messing with a Globe front sight on a Tikka, but the heavier recoil of the light .308 bolt action coupled with the lack of diopter effect from a rear peep that’s still forward of the bolt handle leads me shooting much better so far with the AR.

Now I know what you’re thinking, the UT reg forbids semi auto. Well, that’s where the adjustable gas comes in. With gas turned off, which requires a tool I don’t plan to carry with me in the field, it’s just a straight pull. That’s also the reason for the side charger. MUCH better purchase for getting the bolt open on an action that lacks primary extraction.

Range trip results are extremely positive. Here’s my first sighter group with Hornady Black 123gr BTHP at 2500fps:
IMG_4974.jpeg

After a couple of loosening and tapping sessions with the front sight base, I had windage within 1MOA of centered, which I figured was within the variability of different loads. At this point, I locked the front sight base down with 65in-lbs and red loctite.

The next 10 round group, with 120gr Nosler BTs over a bunch of XBR-8208. My rifles love this load. At 2600fps, it’s hot for an AR, but I’ve got a good bolt and I’m not seeing any pressure signs, so I’ll keep using it. I likely tossed the one or two of the high rounds, but will have to do some more shooting with this load to see:

Ballistic-X-Export-2025-05-02 16:36:31.757981.png

Next (and final) ten round group was with Hornady Black 123gr ELDMs. At 2500fps, they’re slower than my handloads, but I was really impressed with the group. At this point, I was really settling in with the sight setup:
Ballistic-X-Export-2025-05-02 14:00:27.681481.png

I’ll be doing a few more shoot-offs between this and the Tikka .308 as I continue to refine the sights on the Tikka. Another prospective contender is a 1915 production Winchester 1895 in .30-40 Krag, but the lack of suppressor and punishing recoil of that setup may keep it lagging behind in my mind. So far, the little Grendel is displaying the best sights, best shoot ability, and best ergonomics of the group so far. My mind may change when I get the suppressor mounted on the .308, or when I try something lighter than 220gr bullets in the .30-40. We’ll see.

IMG_4987.jpeg
Ballistic-X-Export-2025-05-02 13:58:38.244136.png

IMG_4798.jpeg
IMG_4739.png
Anyone else messing with iron sight combos in anticipation of tags you wont draw?
 

I got the Williams globe muzzleloader sight for my T3X in the mail today. That’ll give me the final dimensions I need to finish the clamp on barrel adapter design.
IMG_5067.jpeg

What are your thoughts on the ruggedness of the receiver sight hanging off the rear of the tikka receiver? I mounted my Redfield further forward on the receiver to give something flat to brace against underneath in the event it gets dropped, but that killed the diopter effect. I had considered mounting it behind the bolt release on the left side, but wasn’t liking it hanging in free space.

I’ve also considered machining an adapter to mount an A2 sight housing behind the bolt and using a Rokstok to get proper cheekweld. I know nothing about fancier target sights, but I do know I’m good with A2s out to 500 IF I can discern the target from the background.
 
What are your thoughts on the ruggedness of the receiver sight hanging off the rear of the tikka receiver?

Rugged is relative. Real diopter sights are rugged enough to start for now. But there is an iron sight true scope replacement gap. As well, a legit adjustable back up iron sight system.


I’ve also considered machining an adapter to mount an A2 sight housing behind the bolt and using a Rokstok to get proper cheekweld. I know nothing about fancier target sights, but I do know I’m good with A2s out to 500 IF I can discern the target from the background.

A2 sights are decent, but not optimum. Biathlon sights, XTC sights, etc. are more inline.
 
Now I know what you’re thinking, the UT reg forbids semi auto. Well, that’s where the adjustable gas comes in. With gas turned off, which requires a tool I don’t plan to carry with me in the field, it’s just a straight pull.
I’d get an opinion from DWR LE on that before I got too far down the road. I suspect they wouldn’t allow that.
 
I’d get an opinion from DWR LE on that before I got too far down the road. I suspect they wouldn’t allow that.
The thought crossed my mind, hence not carrying the allen key that would be required to open up the gas port, but I don't really see what they could object to otherwise. The rifle isn't semi auto without gas cycling the action. I suppose it's not hard to knock out the gas tube roll pin and pull the tube if there's any pushback about having semi auto features still onboard the rifle, but I'd rather not, as it's a pain and I might want to retain semi-auto capability when not hunting UT.
 
Drew the Boulder/Kaiparowits iron sight tag, so time to get serious with this effort. @Formidilosus has convinced me to mess some with a Biathalon sight on a Tikka, and I’ve got a used one on the way courtesy of eBay to see what I can do with

I’m wondering if the recoil from .308 will be too much for proper sight distance with the diopter.
 
I got the Williams globe muzzleloader sight for my T3X in the mail today. That’ll give me the final dimensions I need to finish the clamp on barrel adapter design.
View attachment 876196

What are your thoughts on the ruggedness of the receiver sight hanging off the rear of the tikka receiver? I mounted my Redfield further forward on the receiver to give something flat to brace against underneath in the event it gets dropped, but that killed the diopter effect. I had considered mounting it behind the bolt release on the left side, but wasn’t liking it hanging in free space.

I’ve also considered machining an adapter to mount an A2 sight housing behind the bolt and using a Rokstok to get proper cheekweld. I know nothing about fancier target sights, but I do know I’m good with A2s out to 500 IF I can discern the target from the background.
Williams makes a dovetail FP sight, it might be Wirth emailing them and asking if it opens up to 17mm to fit the tikka reciver dovetail. Then you could just drill it once you had it in position over one of the reciver holes. With an a2, you'd want to swap all the internals for a national match set so you could have diffrent sized aperatures to match whatever sight radius your setup will end up being at, which costs more than the Williams fp sights.
 
Yeah, my bet is not taking the hex key won’t cut it. You’ll have to permanently/semi-permanently modify it so it cannot shoot semi auto. But you really won’t know unless you ask them.
In reference to this. I know people were told that they could not take a variable scope and permanently bond it to only be 1x for the muzzleloader 1x requirement. That leads me to believe that they would use the same logic regarding making a semi-auto single shot.
 
Drew the Boulder/Kaiparowits iron sight tag, so time to get serious with this effort. @Formidilosus has convinced me to mess some with a Biathalon sight on a Tikka, and I’ve got a used one on the way courtesy of eBay to see what I can do with

I’m wondering if the recoil from .308 will be too much for proper sight distance with the diopter.

What did you get?
 
Anyone else messing with iron sight combos in anticipation of tags you wont draw?
Even if I never shoot anything at 300 yards with a peep, it’s fun to be set up to do it. lol

This setup with old as dirt Redfield target sights only works side mounted to bolt gun receivers, but I’ve almost sorted all the parts out, but it has a big learning curve. Luckily Remington/winchester bases are quite commonly found. Side mounts require inletting into the stock and aren’t everyone’s cup of tea in the looks department. In the end something that clamps to the pic rail is 10x less work.

I did not expect it be so hard to adapt a small old globe sight. Many of this size old Lyman or Redfield are sold quite inexpensively, but it better come with the insert you want or they can cost more than the sight itself, and the height is super important so the peep sits at a usable height and isn’t maxed out. Round inserts small enough to align well with small targets that aren’t round have limited field of view, crosshairs seem weird, round dots aren’t as familiar to my brain as a simple flat top like every pistol and muzzleloader I’ve ever pointed at something.

I started with a globe that nobody had inserts for, upgraded to a globe still produced and tracked down front bases that would work. Then considered a bolt on front base, but they are clunky. A threaded base grabbed my attention. After deciding my preference is a simple front flat topped blade he thought came up why not use a better looking base. After staring at the target globe next to a banded sight base I’ve switched directions towards something like Ruger uses - I’ve always liked the way the Ruger looks and feels. Other brands of banded bases come in different heights so that’s probably more practical.

To be usable the height has to work with the stock and your cheek weld. This setup, and many factory iron sights, are definitely on the low side compared to even the lowest height scopes. I’ve been eyeing a stock specifically designed for iron sights, or maybe I’ll get front and rear bases that raise the sights up. Eventually it will be fun to duplicate an old school Palma rifle as well as a good shooting hunting setup.

What I’ve learned is it’s easy to spend as much as a new rifle trying multiple variations to see what makes you smile the most. *chuckle*
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0584.jpeg
    IMG_0584.jpeg
    45.7 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_0582.jpeg
    IMG_0582.jpeg
    45.7 KB · Views: 37
  • IMG_0583.jpeg
    IMG_0583.jpeg
    66.4 KB · Views: 37
  • IMG_0585.jpeg
    IMG_0585.jpeg
    62.3 KB · Views: 37
  • IMG_0580.jpeg
    IMG_0580.jpeg
    209.6 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_0581.jpeg
    IMG_0581.jpeg
    154 KB · Views: 40
Even if I never shoot anything at 300 yards with a peep, it’s fun to be set up to do it. lol

This setup with old as dirt Redfield target sights only works side mounted to bolt gun receivers, but I’ve almost sorted all the parts out, but it has a big learning curve. Luckily Remington/winchester bases are quite commonly found. Side mounts require inletting into the stock and aren’t everyone’s cup of tea in the looks department. In the end something that clamps to the pic rail is 10x less work.

I did not expect it be so hard to adapt a small old globe sight. Many of this size old Lyman or Redfield are sold quite inexpensively, but it better come with the insert you want or they can cost more than the sight itself, and the height is super important so the peep sits at a usable height and isn’t maxed out. Round inserts small enough to align well with small targets that aren’t round have limited field of view, crosshairs seem weird, round dots aren’t as familiar to my brain as a simple flat top like every pistol and muzzleloader I’ve ever pointed at something.

I started with a globe that nobody had inserts for, upgraded to a globe still produced and tracked down front bases that would work. Then considered a bolt on front base, but they are clunky. A threaded base grabbed my attention. After deciding my preference is a simple front flat topped blade he thought came up why not use a better looking base. After staring at the target globe next to a banded sight base I’ve switched directions towards something like Ruger uses - I’ve always liked the way the Ruger looks and feels. Other brands of banded bases come in different heights so that’s probably more practical.

To be usable the height has to work with the stock and your cheek weld. This setup, and many factory iron sights, are definitely on the low side compared to even the lowest height scopes. I’ve been eyeing a stock specifically designed for iron sights, or maybe I’ll get front and rear bases that raise the sights up. Eventually it will be fun to duplicate an old school Palma rifle as well as a good shooting hunting setup.

What I’ve learned is it’s easy to spend as much as a new rifle trying multiple variations to see what makes you smile the most. *chuckle*
where did you get the clamp on target base?
 
where did you get the clamp on target base?

I know just enough to be dangerous and am a poor source of information on these sights. It’s my understanding this style of clamp on base is not as popular as new setups, but you will see them come up for sale used. Some (many?) are designed to fit a straight section 3/4” in diameter, so smaller diameter barrel would need a custom filler bushing. 🙂
 
I know just enough to be dangerous and am a poor source of information on these sights. It’s my understanding this style of clamp on base is not as popular as new setups, but you will see them come up for sale used. Some (many?) are designed to fit a straight section 3/4” in diameter, so smaller diameter barrel would need a custom filler bushing. 🙂
did you get it on ebay or...?
 
did you get it on ebay or...?
Accurate Shooter classifieds is a good source. That photo was off of a rimfire central post - I haven’t searched for more current information. The same same rimfire Central post also showed Brownells used to stock a similar design, but that link doesn’t work.

Guys that are around biathlon rifles probably have good leads.
IMG_0588.jpeg
 
Back
Top