I know this is an old post, but I thought I would post anyway

When I first started hunting in the '50's scopes were not seen on too many rifle in the rural area I lived. Even when I purchased my first bolt action .270 in the late 60's I didn't fully trust the scope to be as rugged and easy to use as "irons". Although scopes have improved greatly regarding reliability, they have become even more sophisticated and complicated in recent years. My eye sight is above average for my age and I still prefer iron sight to scopes for most hunt. I trust their "repeatability", lighter weight, and balance they impart to rifles (especially lever actions). While I do find "aperture" sights a bit more precise, I have not found them to be a lot more precise; as most scope users trying to adjust to irons seem to proclaim. Admittedly, a scope looks more at home on a bolt action rifle and certainly is an advantage for the long range shooting done these days in the "hunting fields"; however, I seem to acquire irons much quicker and find that on most hunts in our (brushy) area I can get an aimed shot off faster and more precise than with a more cumbersome rifle with a scope. Most of my scopes are also of a lower power - 2 3/4, 3, 1-4, 2-7 for their larger field of view, longer eye relief, and lighter weight. I've had to adapt to the scope sight over the last couple of decades, and have even learned to trust their reliability after a "sight in", however, if I had to bet my life on a rifle, it would not be through a piece of glass mounted on top of a steel barrel with aluminum/steel three piece mount and rings. My .02 and biased opinion
